Political Freedom and Democracy Index

The neutrality of this article is disputed. See the controversy section.

The PFDI level map, with lighter colours representing more democratic countries. Countries with PFDI below 2 (totalitarian) are black.

The Political Freedom and Democracy Index or PFDI is a measure of the extent of democratic political participation and political freedoms in Auroran states updated annually by the Institute for the Study of Political Order in Lindossë. The ISPO assigns each state a number between 0 and 10; higher numbers indicate higher levels of political representation and participation and greater political freedoms. The PFDI is not a measure of other factors, such as economic freedoms or quality of life. Several states dispute the validity of their rankings.

The Index

Rank	Country/Territory	Index	Category
1	Karsos	9.23	Free
2	Ardea	9.15	Free
3	Deria	9.10	Free
4	Erth	9.08	Free
5	Norya	8.99	Free
6	Nolophon Caletica	8.95	Free
7	Kantonia	8.92	Free
8	Lindossë	8.14	Free
9	Bontera	8.12	Free
10	Torentine Empire	7.95	Mostly Free
11	Zophos	6.82	Mostly Free
12	Surimtak	6.05	Mostly Free
13	Odessa	5.25	Mostly unfree
14	North Shurkan Union	5.10	Mostly unfree
15	Hundsvergen	4.80	Mostly unfree
16	Nolopherae	4.20	Mostly unfree
17	Indirian	4.14	Mostly unfree
18	Translithania	3.73	Authoritarian
19	Samthuma	3.51	Authoritarian
20	Pravnicka	3.22	Authoritarian
21	Maloumba	2.37	Authoritarian
23	Antara	1.54	Totalitarian
24	Etruria	1.50	Totalitarian
25	Krav Dominion	0.96	Totalitarian
26	Raipea	0.95	Totalitarian
27	Sinoptikon	0.77	Totalitarian
28	Fernandina	0.68	Totalitarian
29	Immaculate People's Communality of Southern Danetia	0.51	Totalitarian

Categorization

Depending on their index value, states are classified as "Free" (8-10), "Mostly Free" (6-7.99), "Mostly Unfree" (4-5.99), "Authoritarian" (2-3.99) or "Totalitarian" (under 2).

Criteria

States are assessed according to four sets of criteria. The ISPO does not reveal the formula that it uses to arrive at the specific index values for each country, but the following factors tend to be relevant. Most countries have a mixture of elements that increase and decrease their standing on the index.

Democratic Representation and Political Structure

Features that place a country higher up on the index include:

• Elected public officials and lawmakers
• Elections are free, fair, and open to all adults
• Functioning multiparty system exists
• Possibility of peaceful transition in government
• Government and civil service free of corruption

Features that place a country lower down on the index include:

• Executive and legislative authority vested in unelected officials
• Restrictions or bans on political parties, or one-party government
• Military influence in politics
• Political violence
• Special political influence exercised outside of political process

Political Participation and Political Culture

Features that place a country higher up on the index include:

• Citizen confidence in elections and political structure
• Public tolerance for political dissent
• Popular understanding of functioning of political system

Features that place a country lower down on the index include:

• Voter intimidation
• Popular belief that official political structure not accurate reflection of real political power
• Extra-legal attempts by non-governmental organizations to influence political outcomes

Political Freedoms

Features that place a country higher up on the index include:

• Freedom of conscience and belief
• Freedom of speech and freedom of the press
• Freedom of assembly
• Equality before the law
• A fair and functional judicial system

Features that place a country lower down on the index include:

• Restrictions (legal or customary) on political speech
• Laws against criticism of the government or public officials
• Police or military violence against citizenry
• Surveillance of populace by state

Civil Space

Features that place a country higher up on the index include:

• Constitutional limitations on powers of government
• Existence of functioning non-governmental organizations
• Autonomy of religious, cultural, and other organizations from government

Features that place a country lower down on the index include:

• Heavy state regulation of daily activities
• Compulsory membership in state or non-state organizations
• State control of religious, cultural, and other non-governmental organizations

ISPO Interpretation

The Fellows of the Institute for the Study of Political Order are not unanimous in their interpretation of the PFDI. There is broad agreement that arrangements that produce higher scores are preferable to arrangements that produce lower scores. The Fellows disagree, however, about whether a score of 10 -- a hypothetical "pure democracy" -- is possible or even desirable. For example, most of the Fellows support the constitutional monarchy of Lindossë despite its (strictly speaking) "non-democratic" aspects.

Controversy

A number of countries disagree with the ratings assigned to them.

• Etrurian political scientists feel the index falsely associates democracy with freedom. However, the rating assigned to Etruria is not refuted.
• Antara agrees with Etruria on the matter of democracy not being a prerequisite of freedom. The Dominion, likewise, also does not refute its rating.
• Communalists allege that the ISPO has a serious misunderstanding of the tenets of Absolute Unionism. According to Communalist thought, each individual is guaranteed civil rights, but must occasionally sacrifice them to fulfill the needs of the Communality. Thus, most Communalist countries do not recognize the PFDI and claim it is purely stockist propoganda.
• Pravnicka considers itself free, or at worst mostly free, while the index defines the country as authoritarian. Pravnick authorities believe this is the result of a misunderstanding of the basic principles of Absolute Unionism by ISPO officials.
• Sinoptikon disputes the ISPO rating purely on the basis of its ongoing insurrection. Officials purport the majority of Sinoptiks are in favor of the Communalist regime, alleging the insurgents are merely disenfranchised former aristocracy. Sinoptik officials blame the duration of the insurgency on stockist financing.
• Many nations feel that Karsos fanatical dedication to the market and pure market solutions as required by the Karsos constitution and the philosophy of Objectivism creates a cash based tyranny. They argue that this makes Karsos government's hands off approach "less free" than governments that allow intervention in society to care for the most needy.
• Odessa's position is it's been grossly mischaracterized. Odessans enjoy freedom of religion, belief, speech, the press, conscious, and assembly. Odessa's elections are free and fair and the State takes its policy direction from the elected President. Odessa considers itself lucky to have many non-governmental agencies, some of which have achieved semi-official status by virtue of the numbers of Odessans who are members. Odessans enjoy a government which sees to their basic needs and their common defense. They see themselves as mostly free.

Tech

Compare to The Economist's Democracy Index.