The Concept of Democracy

The Concept of Democracy

A normative concept
Liberal democracy a compromise
Democratic legitimacy

Democracy and state capacity

Democracy normally refers to the input side
State capacity normally refers to the output side
Democracy might be in conflict with state
capacity
Delaying democratic procedures
Public control as an obstacle to big projects

Democracy and state capacity can also reinforce

each other
Ex. capacity to implement democratically decided
goals

Democracy a normative concept

Democracy is uncontroversially said to mean
rule by the people over common issues
But who is the people?
What do we mean by rule?
What is a common issue?

Classical dividing lines

Representation participatation
Elitism/expert power polical equality
Local autonomy national equality
(Re)distribution of economic resources
Degree of state regulation (how much
government?)
Honesty/transparency secrecy

Why normative?

Why is democracy a normative concept?

Claim of a certain kind of society
Democratic theory and democratic practise
Robert Dahl and polyarchies

Different assumptions
Liberal democracy a generally accepted
framework
Different models build on different normative
assumptions
Ex. limited or extended role of citizens
Different assumptions of competence

Two illustrative examples

Citizens are weak, emotional, impulsive, easily
influenced, intellectually incapable, igonrant,
infantile, have lack of judegment and primitive
prejudices, and education will not be of any
help. (freely from Schumpeter 1943)
Participation learn people democracy and help
people develop democratic awareness (freely
from Pateman 1970)

Different levels of abstraction

Citizen self-determination, or autonomy
Peaceful conflict solution between equals
(Ross)
A regime is democratic to the degree that
political relations between the state and its
citizens feature broad, equal, protected and
mutually binding consultation. (Tilly)

Tillys criteria
Breadth: inclusion of every citizen
Equality: equality among and within
categories of citizens
Protection: against arbitrary action from the
state
Mutually binding: responsibility and
accountability
Consultation: the will of the people is asked
for and considered

Democratic values

Equality
Self determination/autonomy
Inclusion
Participation
Collective focus

Liberal democracy a compromise

Liberal democracy a widely accepted framework
Common focus on political rights and protection
of the citizens

Channels for free debate

Freedom of association
Freedom of protest
Safeguards against oppression of minority, elites
subverting the system

But different arguments

Democratic argument: political equality
Liberal argument: the freedom of the individual

Liberal democracy a compromise

Tensions between liberal and democratic values
Liberal focus:
individual freedom
the protection of the individual from the state
aggregating of individual preferences

Democratic focus:
collective action
inclusion of the individual in the state
common good

Democratic legitimacy
Legitimacy: acceptance on certain grounds
(legal, political, economic, religious)
Democratic legitimacy: acceptance on
democratic grounds
Liberal democracy: majority principle
Participatory democracy: citizen participation
Deliberative democracy: good argument

To conclude
Consciousness of the normative aspect
There is nothing neutral about democracy
Empirical comparative studies also make
assumptions
High theoretic ideals and practical
compromises what is the point?

The concept of democracy

discussion
Is a big gap between ideal and practice a problem
or is it something productive? Why/why not?
Theoretically? Practically?
Is a claim on a certain kind of society necessary to
talk about democracy? Why/why not?
Is it reasonable to make assumptions about
people as self interested or capable of seeing
beyond their own self interest (altruism)? Does it
make any difference for democratic theory?
Why/why not?