The discourses of ‘Western democracy’ and ‘Oriental despotism’ provide for us a lens through which to view both contemporary political developments and the ideological and historical context in which they occur. Illuminating this optic is a particular vision of the past in which the West imagines itself to have an exclusive claim to democracy, to be the legitimate legatee of this advanced form of governance and burdened with the responsibility of spreading this doctrine amongst the uncivilised ‘lesser breeds’. Paradoxically, the political history of the East is viewed as a dark and brutal wasteland in which megalomania, tyranny and bloodshed has always triumphed, creating a cultural and historical landscape that is antithetical to inclusion, diversity and debate. This project therefore begins by documenting the genealogy of the juxtaposition between these ‘discourses of democracy’, tracing their twin histories back through many of the seminal texts of the Western scholarly and literary canon. Moving forward, it notes that this lens has often been brought to bear on the political history of Iraq, reducing the complexities of Iraqi politics down to an austere picture in which the benighted and savage Iraqis are seen as simply incapable of civilising, modernising or democratising. Most recently, the Western mainstream media has invoked this long-held and deep-seated picture of Iraq in its coverage of the democratic elections and referendum held across the nation in 2005. Here, the successes and complexities of post-Saddam Iraqi politics were covered in a highly racialist and overly dismissive lexicon, one that emphasised the political ineptitude of Iraq despite the best efforts of the West. In order to see beyond the doctored image provided for us by the ‘discourses of democracy’, this thesis utilises a body of work referred to here as critical theory. By employing such scholarship, this project navigates between ‘Western democracy’ and ‘Oriental despotism’, it investigates their internal contradictions, identifies the gaps and fissures that fall between them and illuminates alternate histories and narratives of democracy as they pertain to Iraq. To develop this more complex and nuanced picture of Iraqi politics, this project focuses on four key periods in the history of Iraq that demonstrate the nation’s long struggle towards egalitarianism, collective governance and democratic reform. Beginning with ancient Mesopotamia, this study finds the political system of ‘Primitive Democracy’ in widespread use across the region from the very earliest days of civilisation itself. During the Colonial period (1921-1958) we find that despite British occupation and Hashemite hegemony, the Iraqi populace nonetheless fosters a thriving public sphere of political dissent and pro-democracy movements. This continues throughout the series of oppressive regimes that constitute Post-colonial Iraq (1958-2003) where the central state’s manipulation of the ‘discourses of democracy’ ultimately undermines their authority and provides the vacuum in which various ethno-religious political factions emerge and strengthen. Finally, Re-colonial Iraq (2003-2005) is not only witness to extensive attempts by both foreign and domestic powers to control the parameters of debate and discourse, it is also home to an unprecedented spike in political parties and media outlets keen to encourage a more inclusive political order. A more thorough analysis of Iraq’s political history therefore reveals an alternative and more complex lens through which to view Iraq’s past and present. On the one hand it illuminates the Iraqi people’s resistance to oppression and tyranny as well as their struggle towards a more robust and democratic order. On the other, it brings to light various questions about the democratic nature of the West, undermining its claims of democratic exclusivity and probing its potential as a force of tyranny and despotism. This study concludes with an examination of the implications and questions it raises and by identifying recommendations and opportunities for future research. Foremost amongst these however, is the projects final assertion that further work needs to be done in order to salvage democracy from discourse. It argues that we need to move beyond the reductive and simplistic ideologies implicit in the existing ‘discourses of democracy’ towards a more inclusive and robust narrative, one that includes marginalised movements, histories and stories. This would not only help to see beyond the lens provided for us by ‘Western democracy’ and ‘Oriental despotism’ as it pertains to Iraq, but to develop a more kaleidoscopic image of democracy itself.