Unit 1 Essay Plans (2023)
1.1 Evaluate the view that representative democracy is superior to direct democracy
FOR: ***
1. Educated representatives - better judgement (Covid)
2. Speak for minorities and protect their interests
3. Not guaranteed increase (Switzerland - only just over 40%)
AGAINST:
1. If direct - enhance education (Similar to votes for 16)
2. Rule of majority
3. Increase participation - People can vote on single issues instead of party alignment
1.1 Evaluate the view that there is a participation crisis in the UK
FOR:
1. Voting (Decline in voting, not returned to pre 00's low)
2. Pressure Groups ()
3. Clicktivism (Passive participation)
4. Referendums - Continually low participation (Voting system 2011)
AGAINST: ***
1. Voting (On the rise since 00's 54%-67%)
2. Pressure Groups (Rise in interest groups)
3. Clicktivism (Rise in e-petitions - simple and easy)
4. Referendums (Brexit - rise in interest - enhanced participation and education)
1.1 Evaluate the view that increasing direct democracy would have a positive impact on UK
democracy
FOR:
1. Turnout - Increased participation (Brexit turnout: 72.7%)
2. Education - Forces electorate to make a good decision, assumed based on 'rational
choice theory'
3. Mandate - Not a judgement of what MPs think is best, directly ideals of people (AV voting
referendum showed discontent for changing the FPTP election system
AGAINST:
1. Too much may lead to decline (Switzerland on average only 2/5 cast votes, making it less
democratic despite significant direct democracy)
2. Causes miseducation - Extreme spread of fake news during Brexit campaigns (Brexit bus
£350mn a week goes to EU)
3. Be divisive - manipulate political agenda (Johnson in only because of agenda, SNP only in
for INDYref2)
1.2 Evaluate the view that extending the franchise is the most effective way to improve
democracy in the UK
FOR: ***
,1. Votes for 16 - It will increase education and interest in voting and politics, enhances
democracy in many outlets eg petitions, all forms of elections. (75% turnout for 16/17's in
Scotland referendum - despite 18-24 being only 54%)
2. Votes for 16 - Under 18's affected by political decisions and they already participate in
politics, all ideas should co-exist in a democracy so young people should not be ignored as
they are not an effect on party success (Tax- NI paid by all, Petitions signed by young
people, 2019 winchester climate change march led by students)
3. Prisoner votes - Denying prisoner votes is denying fundamental rights which are essential
to a liberal democracy and it can help with rehabilitation and integration which reduces
reoffending (Went to ECHR 2005 as blanket ban is illegal, Ministry of Justice did research
and found support to ease into society reduced reoffending)
AGAINST:
1. Votes for 16 - Show no interest in voting due to other motives (School, friends, social)
2. Votes for 16 - Concerns are similar to 18-24 y/o's so has no effect on democracy (If voted
in 2017 443k Lab and 128k Cons which is similar to 18-24 distribution)
3. Prisoners vote - Some have the right to vote, Prisoners have disregarded the rule of law
which is key to a liberal democracy so do not deserve a vote
1.2 Evaluate the view that extending the franchise has not gone far enough in the UK
FOR:
1. Votes for 16 - Will help to educate and enhance participation in politics (75% of 16/17's
voted in IndyREF)
2. Votes for 16 - As they are affected by political decisions they deserve the right to have a
say over who governs (Pay NI and often disregarded by parties in elections, focus on
pensioners - especially for Conservative)
3. Prisoner votes - Fundamental right to vote, it can help with rehabilitation (Went to ECHR
as blanket ban is infringes on rights, 2013 Ministry of Justice conducted study to find that
support to ease back into society reduces reoffending)
AGAINST:
1. Votes for 16 - Have a lot to consider other than politics, participate in other ways anyway
(2019 Winchester Climate Change March led by students)
2. Votes for 16 - Concerns are similar to 18-24 y/o's (estimated 448k Lab and 128k Cons if
voted in 2017, which is similar to the distribution for 18-24)
3. Prisoner votes - Disregard rule of law and societal norms so do not deserve the right to
vote
1.3 Evaluate the view that it is pressure groups with the greatest means which achieved their
objectives
Means = Resources
FOR:
1. Funding - Higher funding means a more sophisticated campaign which attracts public
(Trade Unions depend on funding to ensure teachers can strike)
2. Insider status - Easy way to communicate with public figures that have significant power
(NFU, gives money to Labour so are considered in policy making to do with agriculture)
3. Celebrity endorsement - (Joanna Lumley supporting the Gurkha Veterans)
, AGAINST: *** (more about contradicting agreement so make this 2nd and argument
agreement with this side)
1. Funding is not required - if the public care enough they will participate (BLM became a
worldwide movement initially with little funding)
2. Insider status is not required to achieve objectives - some pressure groups do not want to
work with the government as they believe the government is the problem, even insider status
p. groups can be ignored or disregarded (BMA requests for 38% nurse payrise, Stop The
War coalition was ignored by Blair in 2003 Iraq war)
3. Celebrity endorsement is not necessary for success and some can damage the image of a
party as they may have no connection to the issue (In a survey from Manchester uni 75%
were unaffected by celebrity endorsement)
1.3 Evaluate the view that group activity undermines democracy in the UK.
FOR: ***
1. Internally undemocratic, no election in pressure groups (BLM - nobody elected leader)
2. Lead to extremists - distorted interests and aims (Justice4Fathers - )
3. Finance of pressure groups influences success (Trade Unions, fund Labour)
AGAINST:
1. Provide participation without being time consuming (NFU and NUT)
2. Promote interest of minorities (BLM, Joanna Lumley and Gurkha Justice campaign)
3. Educate (Just Stop Oil, BMA smoking in enclosed spaces 2007 and in cars ban 2011)
1.3 Evaluate the view that Pressure Groups are able to adequately protect Human Rights
FOR: ***
1. Educate and influence (Amnesty International - spoke out against 'small boats' law)
2. Promote minorities interests (BLM)
3. Hold govt. to account (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty- arguing against animal testing est
1999)
AGAINST:
1. Bias and selective (sectional pressure groups)
2. Not always accurate representation - elitists leading despite not apart of community - out
of touch (BMA CEO - Neeta and Rachel - no medic background)
3. Parliament sovereign - No coercive power (No power to stop law)
1.3 Evaluate the view that Think Tanks and Lobbyists are inappropriate parts of the UK
system
FOR: ***
1. Non democratic - unelected officials influencing policies
2. Meetings are often behind closed doors, outside formal meetings (Cameron Greensil
Whatsapp messages to Chancellor Sunak)
3. Revolving doors and scandals - Patterson scandal 2021
AGAINST:
1. Enhance pluralist democracy - bring expertise
2. Meeting details are supposed to be public
3. Bias prevention (Ministers ban for 2yrs)
1.1 Evaluate the view that representative democracy is superior to direct democracy
FOR: ***
1. Educated representatives - better judgement (Covid)
2. Speak for minorities and protect their interests
3. Not guaranteed increase (Switzerland - only just over 40%)
AGAINST:
1. If direct - enhance education (Similar to votes for 16)
2. Rule of majority
3. Increase participation - People can vote on single issues instead of party alignment
1.1 Evaluate the view that there is a participation crisis in the UK
FOR:
1. Voting (Decline in voting, not returned to pre 00's low)
2. Pressure Groups ()
3. Clicktivism (Passive participation)
4. Referendums - Continually low participation (Voting system 2011)
AGAINST: ***
1. Voting (On the rise since 00's 54%-67%)
2. Pressure Groups (Rise in interest groups)
3. Clicktivism (Rise in e-petitions - simple and easy)
4. Referendums (Brexit - rise in interest - enhanced participation and education)
1.1 Evaluate the view that increasing direct democracy would have a positive impact on UK
democracy
FOR:
1. Turnout - Increased participation (Brexit turnout: 72.7%)
2. Education - Forces electorate to make a good decision, assumed based on 'rational
choice theory'
3. Mandate - Not a judgement of what MPs think is best, directly ideals of people (AV voting
referendum showed discontent for changing the FPTP election system
AGAINST:
1. Too much may lead to decline (Switzerland on average only 2/5 cast votes, making it less
democratic despite significant direct democracy)
2. Causes miseducation - Extreme spread of fake news during Brexit campaigns (Brexit bus
£350mn a week goes to EU)
3. Be divisive - manipulate political agenda (Johnson in only because of agenda, SNP only in
for INDYref2)
1.2 Evaluate the view that extending the franchise is the most effective way to improve
democracy in the UK
FOR: ***
,1. Votes for 16 - It will increase education and interest in voting and politics, enhances
democracy in many outlets eg petitions, all forms of elections. (75% turnout for 16/17's in
Scotland referendum - despite 18-24 being only 54%)
2. Votes for 16 - Under 18's affected by political decisions and they already participate in
politics, all ideas should co-exist in a democracy so young people should not be ignored as
they are not an effect on party success (Tax- NI paid by all, Petitions signed by young
people, 2019 winchester climate change march led by students)
3. Prisoner votes - Denying prisoner votes is denying fundamental rights which are essential
to a liberal democracy and it can help with rehabilitation and integration which reduces
reoffending (Went to ECHR 2005 as blanket ban is illegal, Ministry of Justice did research
and found support to ease into society reduced reoffending)
AGAINST:
1. Votes for 16 - Show no interest in voting due to other motives (School, friends, social)
2. Votes for 16 - Concerns are similar to 18-24 y/o's so has no effect on democracy (If voted
in 2017 443k Lab and 128k Cons which is similar to 18-24 distribution)
3. Prisoners vote - Some have the right to vote, Prisoners have disregarded the rule of law
which is key to a liberal democracy so do not deserve a vote
1.2 Evaluate the view that extending the franchise has not gone far enough in the UK
FOR:
1. Votes for 16 - Will help to educate and enhance participation in politics (75% of 16/17's
voted in IndyREF)
2. Votes for 16 - As they are affected by political decisions they deserve the right to have a
say over who governs (Pay NI and often disregarded by parties in elections, focus on
pensioners - especially for Conservative)
3. Prisoner votes - Fundamental right to vote, it can help with rehabilitation (Went to ECHR
as blanket ban is infringes on rights, 2013 Ministry of Justice conducted study to find that
support to ease back into society reduces reoffending)
AGAINST:
1. Votes for 16 - Have a lot to consider other than politics, participate in other ways anyway
(2019 Winchester Climate Change March led by students)
2. Votes for 16 - Concerns are similar to 18-24 y/o's (estimated 448k Lab and 128k Cons if
voted in 2017, which is similar to the distribution for 18-24)
3. Prisoner votes - Disregard rule of law and societal norms so do not deserve the right to
vote
1.3 Evaluate the view that it is pressure groups with the greatest means which achieved their
objectives
Means = Resources
FOR:
1. Funding - Higher funding means a more sophisticated campaign which attracts public
(Trade Unions depend on funding to ensure teachers can strike)
2. Insider status - Easy way to communicate with public figures that have significant power
(NFU, gives money to Labour so are considered in policy making to do with agriculture)
3. Celebrity endorsement - (Joanna Lumley supporting the Gurkha Veterans)
, AGAINST: *** (more about contradicting agreement so make this 2nd and argument
agreement with this side)
1. Funding is not required - if the public care enough they will participate (BLM became a
worldwide movement initially with little funding)
2. Insider status is not required to achieve objectives - some pressure groups do not want to
work with the government as they believe the government is the problem, even insider status
p. groups can be ignored or disregarded (BMA requests for 38% nurse payrise, Stop The
War coalition was ignored by Blair in 2003 Iraq war)
3. Celebrity endorsement is not necessary for success and some can damage the image of a
party as they may have no connection to the issue (In a survey from Manchester uni 75%
were unaffected by celebrity endorsement)
1.3 Evaluate the view that group activity undermines democracy in the UK.
FOR: ***
1. Internally undemocratic, no election in pressure groups (BLM - nobody elected leader)
2. Lead to extremists - distorted interests and aims (Justice4Fathers - )
3. Finance of pressure groups influences success (Trade Unions, fund Labour)
AGAINST:
1. Provide participation without being time consuming (NFU and NUT)
2. Promote interest of minorities (BLM, Joanna Lumley and Gurkha Justice campaign)
3. Educate (Just Stop Oil, BMA smoking in enclosed spaces 2007 and in cars ban 2011)
1.3 Evaluate the view that Pressure Groups are able to adequately protect Human Rights
FOR: ***
1. Educate and influence (Amnesty International - spoke out against 'small boats' law)
2. Promote minorities interests (BLM)
3. Hold govt. to account (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty- arguing against animal testing est
1999)
AGAINST:
1. Bias and selective (sectional pressure groups)
2. Not always accurate representation - elitists leading despite not apart of community - out
of touch (BMA CEO - Neeta and Rachel - no medic background)
3. Parliament sovereign - No coercive power (No power to stop law)
1.3 Evaluate the view that Think Tanks and Lobbyists are inappropriate parts of the UK
system
FOR: ***
1. Non democratic - unelected officials influencing policies
2. Meetings are often behind closed doors, outside formal meetings (Cameron Greensil
Whatsapp messages to Chancellor Sunak)
3. Revolving doors and scandals - Patterson scandal 2021
AGAINST:
1. Enhance pluralist democracy - bring expertise
2. Meeting details are supposed to be public
3. Bias prevention (Ministers ban for 2yrs)
