College 1 - Introduction
Five criteria from Dahl for a genuinely democratic system
1. Inclusion = with minimal exceptions, all permanent adult residents
must have full rights of a citizenship
2. Political equality = when decisions about policy are made, every
citizen must have an equal and effective opportunity to participate
fully
3. Enlightened understanding = within reasonable limits, citizens
must have equal and effective opportunities to learn about relevant
policy alternatives and their likely consequences
4. Control of the agenda = citizens must have the opportunity to
decide which matters are placed on the public agenda, and how
5. Effective participation = before a policy is adopted, all the citizens
must have equal and effective opportunities for making their views
known to other citizens.
Democracy for Dahl is total participation and total equality (really
radical). Participation must be effective and voting must be equal. All
must have full understanding of policies and control of the agenda, also
all adults must be included.
Representative democracy = Traditional system where citizens elect
representatives to make decisions on their behalf.
→ people feel like it does not offer enough direct influence.
→ voter turnout has generally dropped, though some countries have
tried reforms, like more primaries to make representatives more
accountable to the public.
, Direct democracy = people can make policy decisions directly through
referendum or initiatives. This allows citizens to have more control over
specific issues, bypassing representatives. This model is growing,
especially as people push to have a say on big issues like taxes or
environmental policies.
→ some challenges, like low voter turnout in referendums and the
potential for wealthy interest groups to influence outcomes by funding
campaigns.
Advocacy democracy = Involves citizens or public interest groups
directly engaging with government policy-making without needing
elections. People can attend public hearings, access information through
freedom-of-information laws, or work with ombudsmen to hold the
government accountable.
→ while this approach increases access, it often benefits those with
more resources, education, or expertise, which can lead to inequalities.
No form is truly ideal, each has its advantages and limitations. The goal
should be to ensure that progress on some democratic criteria is not
sacrificed for progress on others.
Four factors that stand out in explaining why there could be an eroding
democratic satisfaction.
1. Polarisation = countries with increasing polarisation show rising
dissatisfaction. Especially in majoritarian systems that generate
winners and losers.
2. Paralysis = citizens do not like a political vacuum (gridlock), so that
has a bad effect on democratic satisfaction.
Five criteria from Dahl for a genuinely democratic system
1. Inclusion = with minimal exceptions, all permanent adult residents
must have full rights of a citizenship
2. Political equality = when decisions about policy are made, every
citizen must have an equal and effective opportunity to participate
fully
3. Enlightened understanding = within reasonable limits, citizens
must have equal and effective opportunities to learn about relevant
policy alternatives and their likely consequences
4. Control of the agenda = citizens must have the opportunity to
decide which matters are placed on the public agenda, and how
5. Effective participation = before a policy is adopted, all the citizens
must have equal and effective opportunities for making their views
known to other citizens.
Democracy for Dahl is total participation and total equality (really
radical). Participation must be effective and voting must be equal. All
must have full understanding of policies and control of the agenda, also
all adults must be included.
Representative democracy = Traditional system where citizens elect
representatives to make decisions on their behalf.
→ people feel like it does not offer enough direct influence.
→ voter turnout has generally dropped, though some countries have
tried reforms, like more primaries to make representatives more
accountable to the public.
, Direct democracy = people can make policy decisions directly through
referendum or initiatives. This allows citizens to have more control over
specific issues, bypassing representatives. This model is growing,
especially as people push to have a say on big issues like taxes or
environmental policies.
→ some challenges, like low voter turnout in referendums and the
potential for wealthy interest groups to influence outcomes by funding
campaigns.
Advocacy democracy = Involves citizens or public interest groups
directly engaging with government policy-making without needing
elections. People can attend public hearings, access information through
freedom-of-information laws, or work with ombudsmen to hold the
government accountable.
→ while this approach increases access, it often benefits those with
more resources, education, or expertise, which can lead to inequalities.
No form is truly ideal, each has its advantages and limitations. The goal
should be to ensure that progress on some democratic criteria is not
sacrificed for progress on others.
Four factors that stand out in explaining why there could be an eroding
democratic satisfaction.
1. Polarisation = countries with increasing polarisation show rising
dissatisfaction. Especially in majoritarian systems that generate
winners and losers.
2. Paralysis = citizens do not like a political vacuum (gridlock), so that
has a bad effect on democratic satisfaction.
