1. Introduction

Topics of this seminar:

  1. What challenges do politicians care about?
  1. What challenges should they care about?
  1. The politics of reform: which politics, which reforms

8 reasons as to why reform happened

  1. People want it (demand for reform)
  1. Public officials want it
  1. Declining party membership/lower turnout/trust in institutions -> citizens not happy with the government
  1. Experts want it
  1. Other non-conventional ways for showing democratic input -> protests, citizens initiatives etc.
  1. Populism and populist demands
  1. Civil society
  1. Changing of the world

Article 1. Advanced democracies and the new politics

  • Authors; Dalton, Scarrow & Cain

Aim of the article: Describing the general 'track record' for democratic institutional reforms in advanced democracies over the latter half of the twentieth century & its implications for the future of democracy

Transformations of reform Citizens, public interest groups and political elites have shown decreased confidence and increased skepticism in institutions and processes of representative democracies and politicians

1. recent calls for reforms are not new

  1. According to the authors, contemporary democracies face popular pressures to:
  1. increase transparency of governance
  1. grant more access
  1. make government more accountable
  1. This is amplified by opinions of experts and government officials
  1. Yet according to the authors, this not like some proponents say 'the most fundamental democratic transformation since the beginnings of mass democracy". -> Cycles of reform are a recurring theme, pressures for change in one direction often wane as new problems and possibilities arise

2. Three modes of democracy

1. Two examples of waves of democratic reform

  1. Early twentieth century: populist movement in the US and EU -> extensive electoral & governing-process reforms + introduction new forms of direct democracy -> making western democracies more democratic
  1. emerged in the last third of the twentieth century: more acces to citizen interest groups & other lpublic lobbying organizations
  • expanded mass media & scrutiny of government
  • increased expectations of citizens who trust less

2. Three modes of democracy that describe the last reform

  1. Direct democracy: reform to this mode calls for net types that bypass (or complement) representative democracy
  1. advocacy democracy: which expands the means of political participation either directly or through surrogates (e.g. public interest groups) while final decisions are still made by elites
  1. Representative democracy: reform to this mode seek to improve electoral processes

most important points on representative:

  1. altough political access saw a slight decrease-> amount of voting is up and suffrage includes younger voters (18 to 20)
  1. number of parties increased as does the transparency
  1. altough electoral turnout has decreased-> general mechanism of repr. democracy has maintained and slightly increased citizens access and influence

most important points on direct

  1. most important means of direct democracy-> initiatives and referenda
  1. allow citizens to decide on goverment policy without mediating influence of representation
  1. changes in both attitude and formal rules have brought about a greater reliance on mechanisms of direct democracy
  1. referendum has won new legitimacy as a basis for national decision making

most important points on advocacy

  1. citizens or public interest groups interact directly with governments and even participate directly in the policy formation process-> altough actual decisions are made by officials
  1. overal expansion is undeniable-> with a move away from trustee to the delegate model
  1. nonconventional forms of political action (demonstrations and protests) have also increased

3. changing of institutional structure of democracy

1. 5 criteria of Dahl

  1. enlightened understanding: within reasonable limits, citizens must have equal and effective opportunities to learn about relevant policy alternatives and their likely consequences
  1. control of the agenda: citizens must have the opportunities to decide which matters are placed on the public agenda and how
  1. political equality: when decisions about policy are made, every citizen must have an equal and effective opportunity to participate
  1. effective participation: before a policy is adopted, all citizens must have equal and effective opportunities for making their views known to other citizens
  1. inclusion: with minimal exeptions, all permanent adult residents must have full rights to citizenship

2. scores of the three modes of democracy on criteria

  1. direct democracy
  1. advocacy democracy
  1. representative democracy
  1. enlightened understanding-> problems of information access, voter decision process-> expansion of electoral marketplace empowers but makes it hard to make meaningful judgement
  1. control of political agenda-> generally better-> still control of campaign debate, selecting candidates
  1. political equality-> one person, one vote-> high turnout maximies equality (but problems of low turnout, campaign financing issues)-> full political equality is probably not fully attainable , equality of access and ussage are becoming adopted
  1. effective participation-> principal agent problems-> fair elections, responsible party-government
  1. inclusion-> universal suffrage fulfills this criteria
  1. political equality-> one person, one vote-> high turnout maximies equality (but problems of low turnout, and equality-> minority can make crucial decisions affecting public welfare)
  1. enlightened understanding-> problems of greater information and higher decisions making costs
  1. inclusion-> universal suffrage fulfills this criteria
  1. control of political agenda-> citizens and groups control the locus and focus of activity
  1. effective participation-> direct access avoids mediated participation
  1. political equality-> equal opportunity (problems of very unequal use)
  1. enlightened understanding-> increased public assess to info (problems of greater info and decision making costs on citizens
  1. inclusion-> equal citizen access (problems of access to non-electoral arenas)
  1. control of political agenda-> citizens and groups control the locus and focus of activity
  1. effective participation-> direct access voids mediated participation

Conclusion

direct and advocacy democracy can complement traditional forms of representative democracy but has consequences that are not yet recognised by advanced industrialised democracies-> the shift from democratic representation to a mixed repertoire must be balanced to account for the advantages and limitations of each of the forms of democracy

Book review of-> agianst elections, the case for democracy by David van Reybrouck

  • Author; Ben Margulies

Aim of the article: + the book does open up discussions on elections, democracy and political power. - but the solution is probably not by political representation in a process of mere chance

1. Problems and solutions according to author

1. main problem according to author: representation of citizens is perverted-> parties becoming state-funded agencies run by media or policy experts. they have become a 'cartel' and a 'caste' of party leaders-> they are dispised by an increasingly disengaged, volatile, capricious and angry electorate-> end result: nasyty or irresponsible populism

2. solution according to author: to bring back sortition-> selection of public officials through the drawing of lots

3. solution off? problem is not democracy-> its electoral-representative democracy and electoral fundamentalists

4. perception and idea of author on democracy: elective representation is aristocratic and not democratic (democracy is not government by the best in society)-> instead it should flourish by allowing a diversity of voices

2. critique of book reviewer

2. second criticism: still relies on experts and officials for advice-> these are not automatically ideologically more diverse then they are now

3. third criticism: his approach to structures other than parties between citizens and their state. those sorted in the new system will be making decisions according to their conscience and what they feel best serves the general interest in the long term instead of political haggling or tactical voting

1. first criticism: only deals with one problem-> alienation from parties and politicians. This is not a freestanding problem-> global pressures go beyond national boundaries. simply finding the way states elect officials fails to address the bigger problem

4. fourth criticism: choosing by lot does not automatically mean that the public will see those chosen as representing them-> does not actually empower ordinary citizens unless they are chosen

5. fifth criticism: proposed model is very complex-> six types of assemblies (agenda assembly, interest panels, review panel, policy jury, oversight council & rules council)