AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (2), 84 – 90

THE CONCEPT OF KARL POPPER ABOUT CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY IN
DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY AND THERE ARE LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM THAT
SO AS TO IMPROVE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SOCIAL MONITORING AND
CRITICISM IN VIETNAM TODAY
Bui Lan Huong1
1

Hanoi Pedagogical University 2

Information:
Received: 03/08/2018
Accepted: 06/12/2018
Published: 11/2019
Keywords:
Karl Popper; democracy;
open sociey; social criticism;
supervision

ABSTRACT
Karl Raimund Popper (1902-1994) was considered one of the most
influential philosophers in the twentieth century. His socio-political thoughts
left us a number of profound lessons for the social construction of today. This
essay focuses on investigating K. Popper's main views on democratic
societies. Based on the study of his conception on the criteria for a
democratic society and on the role of citizens in supervising and criticizing
the work of government, the author recognizes
valuable lessons for
enhancing the efficiency of social supervising and criticism.


we can see that the idea of the citizen's
responsibility to build an ideal society as a shining
gem. An objective scientific research on this
content, therefore, is necessary to help us gain
valuable lessons to improve the effectiveness of
social supervision and criticism for all the citizens
in our country today.

84


AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (2), 84 – 90

2. CONTENT

the case of necessity, to deprive people of
authority without using violence. If there are not
any democratic institutions or if these institutions
are not well-developed and weak, the only way to
monitor and replace the rulers is to bring a
different kind of violence against their violence.
Historically, the establishment of democratic
institutions is of course associated with resisting
militarilist action. From this point, Popper
presented the definition of democracy as follows:
“I understand democracy is not something
indeterminate like the power of the people or the
power of the majority, but it is a system of
institutions ... which allows the social supervision
towards the rulers and dismiss them at the will of

and
practically, by different ways and levels,
depending on their positions, views and interests.

Popper's conception of democracy was built in
parallel with his criticism of violent institutions
and his differentiation between these two types of
institutions. According to Popper, the two most
fundamental characteristics of democratic
institutions compared to the violent ones are,
firstly, the development of a mechanism to
supervise authorized individuals and to eliminate
them if they do not complete their mission and
secondly, the allowance to achieve reforms
without resorting to violence.
However, Popper was very reluctant to divide all
governments into democracy and tyranny. There
is, of course, a clear difference between the rulers
of democracy and those of tyranny. But that does
not mean that we can divide state institutions
clearly into democracy and tyranny simply based
on the difference between democratic and
tyrannic measures. We can only distinguish
relatively to a certain extent to determine the role
of governments in social progress and political
evolution to "democracy and freedom". C. Marx
stressed that the most important thing in assessing
forms of governance is the distinction between
governments in terms of which class relations
they encourage and which class relations they


AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (2), 84 – 90

his thinking compared to other political
researchers is that he did not consider democracy
to be the goal of social construction but only one
of the two key conditions for building society, in
which the responsibility of citizens to participate
in building democracy is significantly important.

elected by the people and responsible to the
people - protects the rights of individuals, so that
citizens in a democratic society can fulfill their
citizens' obligations and responsibilities and
contribute to the strengthening of society. Citizens
must at least be self-aware about the important
issues that society is facing in order to participate
in discussions and to vote wisely (Popper, 1971b).
According to Popper, the meaning of democracy
is to allow reform without the use of violence.
However, if the maintenance of democracy is not
considered the first priority in any fight on this
battlefield, the potential anti-democratic trends
which always exist can cause the breakdown of a
democracy. A thorough understanding of these
principles should necessarily be attained for the
prevention of the risk that democracy could face.

2.2 Citizens' responsibility in a democratic
society from the perspective of Karl Popper

violence can be used to ensure democracy. First,
only under the domination of violence that it can
be used to fight against violence itself. Second,
after achieving democracy, if a democracy is
attacked by domestic or foreign forces, citizens
have the duty to protest and even use violence.
Popper did not object to the use of violence in
constitution and protection of democracy and
freedom.

The most fundamental difference between "open
society" and "closed society" is the ability of
individuals to rationally respond to the problems
they encounter. Members of a closed society are
forced to act in accordance with orders which are
considered as divinely commanded. The signature
characteristic of a closed society is the belief in
the existence of some certain mysterious taboos or
restrictions. The system of these restrictions is
similar to social laws and similar to the laws of
nature that people must strictly obey and
absolutely must not violate.
In contrast, citizens in an open society must have
a critical attitude towards these restrictions and
make their decisions on the basis of mutual
discussion, based on human intellectual capacity.
The presence of rational criticism principles gives
citizens the ability to consciously guide social
development, and manage the "gradual social
transformation technology", creating state

decisions. With that responsibility, people should
nourish their logical reasoning and conscience.

so, the supervision established is considered
defected from a democratic perspective. In that
sense of equality, universal suffrage and
representative ruling regime are really the
measure of supervising democratic equality.
Every member of a democratic society has the
equal rights to participate in the elections and to
choose their delegates to position into the
legislature. It means that no class is excluded from
the democratic supervision process. It also means
that in order to be passed by the legislature, the
laws must have equal relations with every citizen,
so that everyone has the right to be legally
protected and should be equally punished for
violation of the laws.
From the above analysis, Popper emphasized the
relationship between freedom and responsibility
in his socio-political philosophy. According to
Popper, an open society is the society that brings
the most freedom. It extends the ability to look for
differences, the possibility for self-consciousness
and personal development. This broad freedom of
action is associated with responsibility for one's
own decisions, as well as the responsibility of the
state on the basis of the idea of participation in
democratic institutions. Only through the
implementation of such responsibility can the


2.3 Lessons learned from Karl Popper’s
concept of civic responsibility in democratic
society to improve the effectiveness of social
supervision and criticism in Vietnam today
Supervision of government activities means
monitoration, detection, consideration, evaluation
and recommendations for the performance of
official duties by individuals, agencies and
organizations working in the government
88


AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (2), 84 – 90

apparatus. “Social criticism is criticism in general,
but wider in scale and force, of society, people
and scientists about the content, directions and
policies, solutions for the development of the
economy, science - technology, education, social
development of the whole society, the State and
associated organizations” (Ngô Văn Dụ, Hồng
Trà, Trần Xuân Giá, 2011, p.182). Thus, the
object of social criticism is the directions and
policies promulgated by the Party and the State,
and the implementation of those policies. The
scope of social criticism ranges from the
directions and policies on economy, politics,
culture, ideology to domestic and foreign affairs;
therefore it is necessary to gather the synergy of


Supervision is to answer the questions of how the
policies and laws are implemented, what affects
the implementation can have on the socioeconomy and whether the rights of people are
guaranteed. Meanwhile, social criticism is to
answer whether that the proposed directions and
drafted policies, guidelines are suitable, whether
they meet the requirement the ever need of
innovation of the country, the international
integration and the expectation of the people.
By understanding the basic views of K. Popper’s
perspective on democratic society and from
examining his concepts of the standard of a
democratic society and the responsibility of
citizens in building a social society, we can draw
significant lessons for the implementation of
monitoring and social criticism in Vietnam today
as follows.

Second, the role of citizens in monitoring
government activities through the implementation
of social criticism should be determined correctly.
Through the feedback of the people should the
party committees and authorities be aware of the
extent of social consensus and adjust accordingly.
Guidelines and policies are products created by
people, thus, they can be subjective. Without
social feedback, it is difficult to realize the extent
of social consensus; and when a policy is issued
without any feedback, it does not mean that the

expressed.
3. CONCLUSION
Karl Popper’s ideology on the responsibilities of
citizens in a democratic society has various levels
of content but in the scope of this article, the
author decided to focus on exploiting the content
of citizens' responsibility in monitoring the power
implementation of the State and social criticism of
the policies issued by the State to achieve
valuable lessons for the application of Vietnam to
contribute to improving the effectiveness of social
supervision and criticism, and therefore, to build a
socialist rule-of-law state “of the people, by the
people, for the people”.

Third, citizens should be mobilized to actively
learn and thoroughly understand the Party’s
directions and guidelines, the State’s policies, and
to maintain political stances when participating in
social supervision and criticism.
Currently in Vietnam, social supervision and
criticism is the basic function of the Vietnam
Fatherland Front. The supervision of the Vietnam
Fatherland Front and socio-political organizations
is the monitoration, review, detection, evaluation
and recommendations of agencies, organizations,
officials
and
party
members,

explore social issues of the country. Citizens also
need to maintain their objectiveness, political
stance and trust in the Communist Party in order
to prevent hostile forces from taking advantage of
social supervision and criticism to incite people in
joining protests against the State. We love our
country and want the country to develop but that

Popper.K.R (1971). The Open Society and Its
Enemies Vol.2. London: Princeton University
Press, London.
William Gorton (k.n). Karl Popper: Political
Philosophy. Accessed from
/>
90