TOPIC 1: Democracy and Participation
✅Evaluate the view that the UK is suffering from a participation crisis.
Intro:
Definition: A participation crisis involves a large number of the population being disengaged with
political processes.
Factors and criteria: This is manifested as low voter turnout, voter apathy or general disillusionment
with politics; does our democracy lose legitimacy suggesting there is a crisis. Factors; voluntary
opting out, an increase in wider political activity, and potential benefits of non-voting or widespread
disillusionment, critically low voter turnout and a clear reduction in party membership.
Argument: Overall, we are not in a participation crisis as other means of participation compensate
for low voter turnout and overall a majority of society remains engaged; the crisis point has not
been reached.
3 paragraphs
Point: Lack of involvement in voter turnout
Evidence: Voting has decreased dramatically since 1950 where it peaked at 83.9% to 2019 at 67.3%.
Of the 66.1% who voted in 2015 only 36.9% voted conservative so they were only endorsed by
24.4% of potential voters.
2024 lowest turnout in 20 years at 59%
In a 2015 poll by Survation: the most common reason people don’t vote is ‘not believing it will make a
difference’
Explanation: As a representative democracy it is vital turnout is high so the winning government
can claim a legitimate mandate. The downward trend suggests participation is continuing to fall
further undermining our democracy and suggesting there is a crisis.
Evaluation (counter argument): Participation in elections that are deemed important or when
voters are engaged.
Evidence: Brexit 72% turnout and consequently 68% in 2017 as election was during a
polarised/contentious time.
75% of 16-17 voted in the 2014 Scottish referendum; more broadly 84% turnout (highest on a voe
since 1910)
Belfast Agreement referendum 81% turnout.
Explanation: Uninformed voters may endanger our democracy or political system; decision making
should be left to the educated individuals with knowledge on how and when to participate.
Evaluation: Overall, to rely on assumptions that every individual needs to vote to legitimise any
election is a falsehood. Voter turnout remains well above 50% so therefore still represents a large
majority of the country and an increase in uneducated voters would instead skew an election.
Point: Reduction in other methods of participation namely party membership
,Evidence: 2010: 0.8% of the population was a member of a political party. 1980:4.1%
Tory membership has shrunk to 132,000 in 2024 (only 71% of which voted for Kemi Badenoch)
potentially a flaw with democracy if such a tiny fraction of society are choosing the prime minister
(as happened under May, Truss, Sunak)
Explanation: Party membership is a way of enhancing participation and democracy and is
extremely active. Low involvement means party representatives are less in touch but only hear the
desires of a few within their party.
Evaluation (counter argument): Other forms of political participation are increasing
Evidence: Pressure groups have overtaken political parties such as RSPB with over 1 million
members; larger than combined memberships of the three main parties,
Reform UK have claimed to have higher party membership than the tories (230,000)
Explanation: This suggests the nature of interest and participation is changing. Large numbers of
non-voters have shifted their political awareness away from party politics in favour of specific
political issues. Participation has shifted rather than reached a crisis point
Evaluation: Citizens across the country use other means to be involved which by no means equates
to a crisis of participation.
Point: Flawed methods of online participation suggest there is a crisis.
Evidence: Echo chambers online (Cambridge analytica)
Fake news e.g. £350 million for the NHS which Nigel Farage still defends in 2024.
2024 Southport riots incited online hate and negative political engagement, exacerbated by social
media e.g. leader of political party Britain First spread misinformation online that led to rioting.
Explanation:
Evaluation (counter argument): Social media can provide useful methods of engagement and
participation particularly with younger voters who are less likely to vote.
Evidence: Petition for a second referendum reached 6.1 million signatures.
Reform UK uses social media to engage with voters and not spend as much, arguably exercising
political rights and encouraging disengaged voters to engage. Nigel Farage has 2.2 million followers on
Twitter.
Digital democracy, increased engagement in political forums or discussions online.
In 2017 around 1.86 million signatures were collected to stop president trump having a state visit – this
worked and he came on business rather than a state visit
Explanation:
Evaluation: Overall, we are not in a participation crisis but a representation issue. Low voter turnout
cannot be wholly characterised as individuals being uneducated or unaware but rather citizens
exercising their freedom of choice.
,Conclusion
In conclusion, the arguments most conclusive from the source favour the view that there is not a
participation crisis. It definitively outlines how if you look at the entire political process, involvement
is not so dangerously low we have reached crisis point. When it really matters voter turnout and
more widely political participation is high.
✅Evaluate the extent to which pressure groups enhance democracy.
Intro:
Definition: Pressure groups are organisations who use various forms of advocacy or lobbying in
order to influence public policy or public opinion. There are casual, sectional, insider and outsider
groups.
Factors and criteria: Factors include their negative or positive effect on participation,
representation, scrutiny or education. Criteria; do pressure groups have an actual impact on politics
and are they able to improve citizen participation and government scrutiny.
Argument: Overall, they bolster citizen participation and represent those otherwise unheard
therefore enhancing democracy.
Representation
Point: Pressure groups limit democracy as they themselves are undemocratic and at times elitist.
Evidence: Cash for Questions scandal 1994.
Cash for access scandal
Groups with the most money dominate the political sphere, large corporations can use their wealth;
Owen Patterson, a Conservative MP, recently had to resign after he was suspended from the House
of Commons for flagrantly lobbying on behalf of his company, where he had a second job.
David Cameron in 2010 expressed views that “secret corporate lobbying” was undermining public
confidence in politics and responded with the 2014 Lobbying Act.
When David Cameron was PM, the owner of the financial firm Greensill Capital Lex Greensill was his
senior advisor, and had access to key government departments. After leaving politics, Cameron
went on to be a lobbyist at Greensill Capital, lobbying Matt Hancock to use Greensill Capital’s
services in the NHS during the pandemic
Explanation: These examples outline how corporations, through their wealth and resources, can
lobby politicians and gain influence via this route. The corporations are not democratically elected
so should not be able to affect the government so decisively.
Evaluation (counter argument): Can be argued they represent minorities who would otherwise be
ignored.
Evidence: Stonewall lobby on behalf of the LGBT+ community who have faced significant adversity
, and prejudice.
The Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 came about after 100,000 disabled people engaged in
mass protest.
Also- insider groups can represent key interests: BMA (British Medical Association) successfully
campaigned for a 2% rise of doctors wages post-pandemic. Junior Doctors approved 22 percent pay
rise by labour 2024
Pressure group ForWomenScotland challenged the Scottish Government's implementation of the
Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act (2018). Arguably representing the interests
of women.
Explanation: Therefore policy making is diversified and the government is forced to consider the
needs of a larger demographic.
Evaluation (mini-conclusion): Overall pressure groups do indeed enhance democracy. While they do
represent those with greater funds to a larger extent, the meaningful representations they do
provide is crucial.
Participation
Point: Civil disobedience does not contribute to democracy positively
Evidence: ‘Just stop oil’ frequently uses tactics of disruption and threatens order in society.
‘Extinction rebellion’ have used the same methods
Explanation: This undermines democratic processes and displays a disregard for lawful means of
participation implying a lack of faith in the system. It also sets a precedent for lawlessness and
encourages a general disregard for the legal system leading to an erosion of respect for the rule of
law; a key feature of modern democracies.
Evaluation (counter argument): PGs promote meaningful participation
Evidence: 40-50% of the population are part of a PG compared to 0.8% a political party.
RSPB has 1 million members; more than three main parties combined.
Explanation: helps avoid a participation crisis and combats declines in other methods of
participation (voting etc). THey ensure public opinion is conveyed to those in power.
Evaluation (mini-conclusion): While some forms of participation are flawed, any active participation
creates a healthier democracy. They avoid disengagement and ensure there is widespread political
opinion.
Education
Point: PGs fail to adequately educate the public and can spread misinformation.
Evidence: Leave.eu faked photos of women being attacked by migrants said to be in UK waters
(fake).
Extinction rebellion ‘billions of people are going to die in quite short order’
Explanation: If voters are misinformed or consume fake news democracy is hindered. Votes could
✅Evaluate the view that the UK is suffering from a participation crisis.
Intro:
Definition: A participation crisis involves a large number of the population being disengaged with
political processes.
Factors and criteria: This is manifested as low voter turnout, voter apathy or general disillusionment
with politics; does our democracy lose legitimacy suggesting there is a crisis. Factors; voluntary
opting out, an increase in wider political activity, and potential benefits of non-voting or widespread
disillusionment, critically low voter turnout and a clear reduction in party membership.
Argument: Overall, we are not in a participation crisis as other means of participation compensate
for low voter turnout and overall a majority of society remains engaged; the crisis point has not
been reached.
3 paragraphs
Point: Lack of involvement in voter turnout
Evidence: Voting has decreased dramatically since 1950 where it peaked at 83.9% to 2019 at 67.3%.
Of the 66.1% who voted in 2015 only 36.9% voted conservative so they were only endorsed by
24.4% of potential voters.
2024 lowest turnout in 20 years at 59%
In a 2015 poll by Survation: the most common reason people don’t vote is ‘not believing it will make a
difference’
Explanation: As a representative democracy it is vital turnout is high so the winning government
can claim a legitimate mandate. The downward trend suggests participation is continuing to fall
further undermining our democracy and suggesting there is a crisis.
Evaluation (counter argument): Participation in elections that are deemed important or when
voters are engaged.
Evidence: Brexit 72% turnout and consequently 68% in 2017 as election was during a
polarised/contentious time.
75% of 16-17 voted in the 2014 Scottish referendum; more broadly 84% turnout (highest on a voe
since 1910)
Belfast Agreement referendum 81% turnout.
Explanation: Uninformed voters may endanger our democracy or political system; decision making
should be left to the educated individuals with knowledge on how and when to participate.
Evaluation: Overall, to rely on assumptions that every individual needs to vote to legitimise any
election is a falsehood. Voter turnout remains well above 50% so therefore still represents a large
majority of the country and an increase in uneducated voters would instead skew an election.
Point: Reduction in other methods of participation namely party membership
,Evidence: 2010: 0.8% of the population was a member of a political party. 1980:4.1%
Tory membership has shrunk to 132,000 in 2024 (only 71% of which voted for Kemi Badenoch)
potentially a flaw with democracy if such a tiny fraction of society are choosing the prime minister
(as happened under May, Truss, Sunak)
Explanation: Party membership is a way of enhancing participation and democracy and is
extremely active. Low involvement means party representatives are less in touch but only hear the
desires of a few within their party.
Evaluation (counter argument): Other forms of political participation are increasing
Evidence: Pressure groups have overtaken political parties such as RSPB with over 1 million
members; larger than combined memberships of the three main parties,
Reform UK have claimed to have higher party membership than the tories (230,000)
Explanation: This suggests the nature of interest and participation is changing. Large numbers of
non-voters have shifted their political awareness away from party politics in favour of specific
political issues. Participation has shifted rather than reached a crisis point
Evaluation: Citizens across the country use other means to be involved which by no means equates
to a crisis of participation.
Point: Flawed methods of online participation suggest there is a crisis.
Evidence: Echo chambers online (Cambridge analytica)
Fake news e.g. £350 million for the NHS which Nigel Farage still defends in 2024.
2024 Southport riots incited online hate and negative political engagement, exacerbated by social
media e.g. leader of political party Britain First spread misinformation online that led to rioting.
Explanation:
Evaluation (counter argument): Social media can provide useful methods of engagement and
participation particularly with younger voters who are less likely to vote.
Evidence: Petition for a second referendum reached 6.1 million signatures.
Reform UK uses social media to engage with voters and not spend as much, arguably exercising
political rights and encouraging disengaged voters to engage. Nigel Farage has 2.2 million followers on
Twitter.
Digital democracy, increased engagement in political forums or discussions online.
In 2017 around 1.86 million signatures were collected to stop president trump having a state visit – this
worked and he came on business rather than a state visit
Explanation:
Evaluation: Overall, we are not in a participation crisis but a representation issue. Low voter turnout
cannot be wholly characterised as individuals being uneducated or unaware but rather citizens
exercising their freedom of choice.
,Conclusion
In conclusion, the arguments most conclusive from the source favour the view that there is not a
participation crisis. It definitively outlines how if you look at the entire political process, involvement
is not so dangerously low we have reached crisis point. When it really matters voter turnout and
more widely political participation is high.
✅Evaluate the extent to which pressure groups enhance democracy.
Intro:
Definition: Pressure groups are organisations who use various forms of advocacy or lobbying in
order to influence public policy or public opinion. There are casual, sectional, insider and outsider
groups.
Factors and criteria: Factors include their negative or positive effect on participation,
representation, scrutiny or education. Criteria; do pressure groups have an actual impact on politics
and are they able to improve citizen participation and government scrutiny.
Argument: Overall, they bolster citizen participation and represent those otherwise unheard
therefore enhancing democracy.
Representation
Point: Pressure groups limit democracy as they themselves are undemocratic and at times elitist.
Evidence: Cash for Questions scandal 1994.
Cash for access scandal
Groups with the most money dominate the political sphere, large corporations can use their wealth;
Owen Patterson, a Conservative MP, recently had to resign after he was suspended from the House
of Commons for flagrantly lobbying on behalf of his company, where he had a second job.
David Cameron in 2010 expressed views that “secret corporate lobbying” was undermining public
confidence in politics and responded with the 2014 Lobbying Act.
When David Cameron was PM, the owner of the financial firm Greensill Capital Lex Greensill was his
senior advisor, and had access to key government departments. After leaving politics, Cameron
went on to be a lobbyist at Greensill Capital, lobbying Matt Hancock to use Greensill Capital’s
services in the NHS during the pandemic
Explanation: These examples outline how corporations, through their wealth and resources, can
lobby politicians and gain influence via this route. The corporations are not democratically elected
so should not be able to affect the government so decisively.
Evaluation (counter argument): Can be argued they represent minorities who would otherwise be
ignored.
Evidence: Stonewall lobby on behalf of the LGBT+ community who have faced significant adversity
, and prejudice.
The Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 came about after 100,000 disabled people engaged in
mass protest.
Also- insider groups can represent key interests: BMA (British Medical Association) successfully
campaigned for a 2% rise of doctors wages post-pandemic. Junior Doctors approved 22 percent pay
rise by labour 2024
Pressure group ForWomenScotland challenged the Scottish Government's implementation of the
Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act (2018). Arguably representing the interests
of women.
Explanation: Therefore policy making is diversified and the government is forced to consider the
needs of a larger demographic.
Evaluation (mini-conclusion): Overall pressure groups do indeed enhance democracy. While they do
represent those with greater funds to a larger extent, the meaningful representations they do
provide is crucial.
Participation
Point: Civil disobedience does not contribute to democracy positively
Evidence: ‘Just stop oil’ frequently uses tactics of disruption and threatens order in society.
‘Extinction rebellion’ have used the same methods
Explanation: This undermines democratic processes and displays a disregard for lawful means of
participation implying a lack of faith in the system. It also sets a precedent for lawlessness and
encourages a general disregard for the legal system leading to an erosion of respect for the rule of
law; a key feature of modern democracies.
Evaluation (counter argument): PGs promote meaningful participation
Evidence: 40-50% of the population are part of a PG compared to 0.8% a political party.
RSPB has 1 million members; more than three main parties combined.
Explanation: helps avoid a participation crisis and combats declines in other methods of
participation (voting etc). THey ensure public opinion is conveyed to those in power.
Evaluation (mini-conclusion): While some forms of participation are flawed, any active participation
creates a healthier democracy. They avoid disengagement and ensure there is widespread political
opinion.
Education
Point: PGs fail to adequately educate the public and can spread misinformation.
Evidence: Leave.eu faked photos of women being attacked by migrants said to be in UK waters
(fake).
Extinction rebellion ‘billions of people are going to die in quite short order’
Explanation: If voters are misinformed or consume fake news democracy is hindered. Votes could
