Democracy and Participation
What is democracy?
Democracy means “rule by
the people.”
Democracy is based on
two values:
I.)POLITICAL
PARTICIPATION-
where key decisions are
made by the people,
reflecting the notion of
government by the people.
In this context the
“participants” are the
electorate.
II.)POLITICAL EQUALITY-
where
each citizen is free and has
What is a democratic country?
A democratic country is where
the major decisions that
affect society are made by
the people, whether directly
or indirectly. Each person has
an equal right to make their
opinion count. The more
popular consent or agreement
on a policy, law,
representative or
government, the more
“legitimate” it is.
 Types of
democracy
There are two types of democracy

I.) DIRECT DEMOCRACY- where the people make the key political
decisions by themselves. This abolishes any distinction between the
state and the citizens as it is a form of self-government. The
effectiveness of this model of democracy is directly proportional to
the extent of popular participation.

II.) REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY- this is an indirect and limited form

of democracy where the people choose who shall make decisions on
their behalf. The people vote for their representative who speaks on
behalf of their constituents. The representative can be re-elected or
removed during elections. The success of this model of democracy is
also directly proportional to popular control over the government.
 Direct democracy
Features of direct democracy:

I.) Popular participation is direct; citizens themselves make

decisions, they are not confined to choosing individuals who do.

II.) Popular participation is unmediated; the people are the

government, there is no separate elite or ruling-class between
the government and their people.

III.) Popular participation is continuous. Citizens engage in politics

on a regular basis as all decisions are directly made by the people.

Historic examples of direct democracy include Ancient Athens and

communal tribes, whilst modern day examples are the use of
referendums which inform a government’s decision.
 Direct democracy
Benefits of direct democracy:
I.) It is the only form of “pure”
democracy. It ensures that people will
obey the law, as many are likely to
obey the laws that they personally
approve. Their “general will” becomes
law. There is not a gulf between the
government and the people.
II.) Personal development; direct
democracy leads to an educated society.
Citizens are informed and
knowledgeable as many are encouraged
to take part in politics to understand
how their society works or even should
work.
III.) Direct democracy does not allow for
the people to put their faith with
elected politicians who constantly spin
doctor the truth in order to distort
public opinion.
IV.) Legitimate government; direct
democracy ensures that government is
Drawbacks of direct democracy:
I.) Direct democracy is incredibly
unworkable in the modern world.
This form of democracy requires
all citizens to engage in politics
and decision-making (reflected in
the idea of political equality.) All
citizens must be able to meet in a
single place to express their
opinion. This is impossible for the
entire population.
II.) Also direct democracy implies
that politics is the only job for
citizens, they cannot be
expected to have careers or a
personal life, citizens would not
be able to engage in any other
activities.
 Representative
Features
democracy Benefits of representative
democracy:
representativ
of I.) Practical democracy. Representative democracy is the only form
e of democracy that is effectively workable in the modern world;
democracy: popular participation is brief and limited.
I.) Popular participation
is indirect; citizens II.) Government by experts. Representative democracy places
choose who make the decision- making with professional politicians, these people are
decisions through the generally more educated and experienced than the masses of the
electoral vote. people. Therefore they are able to govern according to their
superior knowledge they possess for the national interest.
II.) Popular
participation is limited III.) Representative democracy provides mediation between the
as the act of voting is public and the government. Ordinary citizens are free to get on with
limited to every few their lives as they are relieved from the burden of decision-making,
years. allowing many citizens to have careers and social life as they only
III.) Popular choose who gets to govern.
participation is
mediated; people are IV.) Political stability is created. Representative democracy
linked to the maintains stability as the public are distanced from politics; the
government through more involved we become the more passionate and committed we
various institutions. become, unwilling to accept compromise. Political stability is
maintained as citizens of the state are likely to accept compromise.
 Representative
democracy
Drawbacks of
representative democracy:
I.) Representative democracy in
theory is a formality. This is
because the act of voting is when
the government decides the
election. The people in theory do
not hold any control over the
government between elections,
making representative
democracy unsuccessful.
II.) There has been a growing
concern of how politicians
represent the people, whether it is
through the doctrine of the
mandate, the delegate model,
trusteeship or by descriptive
representation. Seems that all
have failed to represent those
who they claim to represent.
Liberal democracy
A liberal democracy is a form of
representative democracy, therefore
indirect. The right to rule and govern is
gained through electoral success based
on political equality (one person, one
vote). It combines the liberal goal of
limited government with a commitment
to democracy and popular participation.
In a liberal democracy, the
basic conditions must be met:
-Elections must respect the principle of
universal suffrage and are to be free
and fair.
-Civil liberties and individual rights
are guaranteed
-The government must operate in a
legal, constitutional framework
-A capitalist or private enterprise
economy.
A Liberal democracy attempts to
balance the need for democracy with
 Liberal
democracy
I.) There is CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY where the government operates
There are 2 main types of liberal democracy:
within clear constitutional guidelines, ensuring the protection of individual and
minority rights. Constitutional democracy is associated with countries that
have a codified constitution, USA, France and Germany.

II.) There is MAJORITARIAN DEMOCRACY where majority interests take

precedence over the minorities, as the majority speaks on behalf of the
people. This majority rule emphasizes the collective interests of society, rather
than the individual interests.
Constitutional V Majoritarian Democracy
Democracy
S Protects
Protects the individual society
Divides Parliamentary
sovereignty sovereignty
Proportional Majoritarian
elections elections
Coalition Single-party rule
government (usually)
Fragmented Centralised and stable
governments governments
 Democracy in the
UK
The main features of the British democratic system

Elections
Elections in Britain are free and fair as they are based on universal suffrage and they
provide electoral choice. Also votes are cast via the secret ballot bringing an end to
bribery and intimidation which ensures that voters can freely express their views at
election time.

In 1948, Parliament passed another reform which established the idea of “one person,
one vote” creating political equality. Before this reform many privileged members of
society were able to vote plurally.

In 2000, the Electoral Commission had been established aiming to restore confidence
and integrity in British democracy.

However many have questioned the “fairness” of our electoral process as

I.) Certain key political posts remain unelected, like the Head of State, the House of Lords.
Both institutions lack democratic legitimacy.

II.) The first-past-the-post method has been criticised as many votes are wasted as the
winner needs to achieve a simple plurality of votes. Incredibly tight elections distort the
real preferences of the public.
 Democracy in the
UK
Universal Suffrage

In 1928 the vote was extended to females, ending gender

discrimination, whilst in 1968 the voting age was lowered to 18. In
this country all 18 year olds regardless of their sex are eligible to
vote.

However

I.) There are requirements for the electoral register, resulting in

the homeless, the Lords, prisoners and the mentally ill’s right to
vote being denied.

II.) Although a right to vote is guaranteed, this does not ensure that all
eligible members of society do vote. There have been growing levels
of voter apathy especially in the 1997, 2001 and 2005 elections.
Furthermore, non-voting is common amongst the poor and the most
disadvantaged in society.
 Democracy in the
UK
Electoral Choice

This element is vital to democracy as voters must have a choice on the

ballot paper. This is ensured by party and candidate competition. Initially
we have had the Conservative Party and the Whigs, and then followed by
the formation of the Liberal, Labour and Social Democratic Parties.
Electoral choice in Britain has constantly evolved. As a result multiparty
systems have emerged from election results.

BUT

I.) The two-party system still remains in Westminster as Labour and the
Conservatives remain the dominant parties, despite the Liberal
Democrats.

II.) Electoral choice seems to be an apparent illusion with growing

consensus politics. Both New Labour and the Tories have advocated free
market economics. Voters have little choice on key issues. Elections are
mainly won based on party’s position on the EU and Crime. Contrasting
 Democracy in the
UK
Pressure Groups

Pressure groups add to the democratic process as they give a voice to those who
are ignored by the majoritarian system. By joining pressure groups citizens exert
influence over the government through elections as they provide a vehicle for
participation beyond the act of voting. Thus pressure groups supplements
democracy as it promotes pluralist democracy leading to real developments in
political equality.

BUT

I.) Some pressure groups concentrate power rather than distribute it. Financially
powerful groups are able to buy influence through donation to political parties.
Many argue that business groups have an unfair advantage as the government
relies on their cooperation for the economic proposals.

II.) Pressure groups seem to undermine Parliament as an elected body.

They undermine the representative process, weakening the role of elected
officials. Pressure groups are not popularly elected and unaccountable to
the public.
 Democracy in the
Devolution UK

In 1998 after successful referendums, Scottish, Welsh and Northern

Irish regional assemblies were created. These nations were given a
distinctive political voice to run local affairs. Parliament would always
be dominated by English Mps likely to ignore other nations. Voters in
the respective regions can express their concerns about their regional
issues. Devolution has also widened participation, strengthening
political education.

BUT

I.) Devolution has fallen short as many powers are in reality limited and
can be overturned by Westminster. Major economic decisions and
foreign policy lies with the cabinet and Whitehall.

II.) Devolution has raised the West Lothian Question. Devolution has
failed to advance English democracy. Tam Dayell has called for a
separate English assembly as most British people in England.
 Democracy in the
UK
The European Union
Britons are able to exercise their influence through the European Union.
This is done via the proportional, fixed term elections to the EU. The
proportional voting system has strengthened the democratic process as
parties gain a fair share of seats from their votes, for example the Green
Party, UKIP and the BNP have done well in the EU elections.

But

I.) Many eurosceptics have argued that the growth in EU power has come
at the expense of Westminster’s. The sovereignty of Parliament has been
undermined and threatened.

II.) In reality the EU has very little influence and control over the
European Commission with little policy-making powers, suffering
from an internal democratic deficit.
 A democratic deficit?
Is the UK a truly democratic nation?
British democracy has come under attack by the conflicting ideas of popular
democracy and parliamentary democracy. For example the majority of Britons
opposed the Iraq invasion, yet Parliament declared war. The UK conforms to a
majoritarian democracy. The executive is accountable to Parliament; however
public interest is determined by the executive, not by the public themselves? If
the UK ensures majority rule, civil liberties are likely to be threatened or
curtailed.

The Participation Crisis.

Due to increasing voter apathy, many claim that the UK is suffering

from a participation crisis.

In 1997 only 71% of the electorate actually voted, New Labour’s “landslide” victory
was won by more votes that the narrow result of the 1992 election! The
membership of the UK’s political parties has dramatically decreased over the
years.
Party loyalty has declined. Many people do not identify themselves with a party
or a set of values. This leads to more marginal seats and more “floating voters.”
However the growth of pressure group membership and activism has
increased, negating the notion of a participation crisis. Maybe the problem
 A democratic deficit?
There are three main factors that could explain declining turnouts
at election time.
Blame the electorate- it could be argued that society in general has become more
materialistic in this current consumerist society. Thatcher asserted that “there is no such
thing as society.” have we become individuals concerned with our self-welfare. The declining
turnout can be seen as an epidemic with union membership and church attendance also are
at an all time low.

Blame the media- the media have caused immense problems for the public to trust and put
their faith into politics. The media have moved away from political analysis to scandalous
allegations to sell papers. Examples include the expenses scandal, cash for honours and the
Tory Sleaze during the 1990s.

Blame the politicians- politicians have done nothing to improve and restore faith back
into politics.
 Politicians seem to care about nothing other than getting elected, thus lacking a sense
of direction and moral values. “Bigotgate” proved to be the final nail in the coffin for
Labour’s 2010 defeat. This claim is also supported by the transition from programmatic
parties to catch all ones.

 There has been a growth in spin-doctoring. Parties distort the truth to establish a
favourable response in order to gain support. Politics has become “style over substance.”
Politicians seem to create the impression of being lying snakes desperate to have a career.

 Parties have distanced themselves from their grass root ideologies. The consensus
politics have explained electoral decline as parties seek to gain the support of middle
 Enhancing democracy
Many reforms have been
advocated in order to
improve democracy in the
UK.
I.) Widening Direct Participation-
this reform includes the wider use
of referendums. A referendum is
a popular vote by which the
electorate expresses their view
on a particular policy. They are
used to inform the government
regarding public opinion. They
differ from elections as they do
not fill a public office.
Referendums are a device of
direct democracy.
However referendums are only
used when decided by the
government. Citizens cannot
initiate them. Government only
call referendums that they are
likely to win. Examples include
entry to the EU and the issue of
devolution.
For referendums
As referendums constitute
direct democracy, any changes
based on the result of a
referendum would be
democratically legitimate
Referendums promote political
education. They act as an agent
to widening participation,
sparking debate on particular
issues, leading to an informed
and educated electorate
Referendums are a check on
the government’s power as
Parliament has little control
over the outcome.
Against referendums
Referendums only provide
public opinion at a given time.
They are unreliable guide to
the public interest in the long
term.
Although many supported
the entry to the EU in the
1970s, many wish to
withdraw from it today.
Referendums undermine
parliamentary sovereignty and
parliamentary democracy;
decisions are not made through
deliberation and government
by experts but by a public who
are uneducated on policy
matters in depth.
Referendums also lead to
irresponsible government
neglecting their purpose.
Governments are elected to
govern; they make policy
proposals and implement
them and are called to
account for their decisions.
 Enhancing democracy
II.) Compulsory Voting- electoral choice depends on the electorate choosing
to vote as well. The participation crisis may be resolved by introducing
compulsory voting.
For compulsory voting
Politicians may engage with other electorates in
order in win office as they need to recognise other
concerns than “middle England.” This also
promotes the notion of healthy citizenship,
strengthening civic duty. The more participants in
politics, the more they will think and act as full
citizens of the community and the state.
Compulsory voting will lead to greater legitimacy.
Governments that are formed based on
compulsory voting would depend on a popular
majority, thus strengthening legitimacy of
governments. Popular support must be
widespread for the government’s right to rule.
By default compulsory voting would lead to greater
turnout rates. As electoral turnout is vital to
representative democracy, in theory the
participation crisis would be resolved. Genuine
political equality requires that not only do we have
a right to vote, but all do vote.
Against compulsory voting
The notion of compulsory voting goes against the
idea of democracy; it is a violation of individual
freedom. People may choose not to vote as they
may be disaffected by the lack of choice between
parties and the current political system.
Compulsory voting may lead to further wasted
votes. Those who do not vote usually are those
who are the least interested and uneducated in
these matters.
Forcing those that fit this description to vote would
inevitably lead to irrational votes being cast.
People may choose to vote based on artificial
reasons, which may disaffect regular voters.
Compulsory voting may lead to parties changing
their strategies by developing policies to fit
marginal voters rather than the mass of the
electorate, thus distorting the ideological mood of
the nation.
 Enhancing democracy
III.) Digital Democracy-
maybe the cause of the
participation crisis lies with
the physical act of voting
being out of touch with the
public. Many of us are tied
with jobs, families and
social lives to find time to
vote.
Voting essentially becomes
a burden. Many call for a
modern form of democracy.
Maybe we could
incorporate democracy with
the digital age; interactive
screening, e-mails etc
For digital democracy
Digital democracy allows
for
easier participation. Electronic
democracy would allow the
electorate to express their
views easily without having a
major
distraction in their everyday
life,
having a positive affect on
participation. The
“democratic deficit” may be
explained as former
democratic processes have
failed to be modern. If
citizens have the chance to
participate in different forms
of democracy they may well
do.
Digital democracy is relatively
easy to organise, other forms of
democracy such as
referendums requires
significant time, resources and
cost to set up.
Against digital democracy
Digital democracy may lead to
electoral malpractice, the main
problem is that it would be
hard to control and scrutinize.
Postal voting has led to
alleged malpractice. The
dangers of the internet results
in corruption; power will end
up in the wrong hands. The
present method of physical
voting allows it to be policed
and checked properly.
Digital democracy poses a
threat to the “integrity” of
democracy. It would erode and
demean politics into more of a
reality show and citizens’ rights
are nothing more than
consumer choices.
 Enhancing democracy
IV.) Reducing the voting age- Today’s youth are incredibly disaffected due to the tabloid press
labelling us as a bunch of “juvenile delinquents” who carry knifes and post their crimes on
youtube. Maybe lowering the voting age will improve maturity in young people and they may not
get such a hard time from the media. Even the age of the majority is inconsistent. At 16 we can
gamble and join the army but at 18 we can purchase alcohol and violent video games. Many
minor parties have backed the call for votes at sixteen. Independent commissions have also
backed this call. With the growth of a number of youth democratic organisations, lowering the
voting age seems to be the next step.
For lowering the voting age Against lowering the voting age
By addressing; youth interests, hopeful It may lead to immature voters. Most
politicians would actually have to bring young people still live with their parents
cause to issues which young people face, and remain in full-time education. They
drugs, alcohol, exams etc. youth interests are not yet full citizens. Most young
are increasingly ignored leading to a people would not be interested in politics.
forgotten generation. They would resort to voting whoever their
friends choose to vote for.

It does seems extremely unfair that mature
16 year olds are denied the right to vote
yet uneducated, ignorant adults have this
right and in fact choose not to.
By lowering the voting age, it seems that
we are forcing children to accept adult
responsibilities. It is not a question of their
maturity, but during the difficult time of
adolescence, that state expects them to
make political judgements?

By lowering the voting age the youth maybe
strengthen their interests in politics making
the matter more meaningful. This leads to
stronger political engagement as another
section of society participate in politics.
The belief that young people suffer from
political injustice is absurd. Their votes are
only delayed; their representation is
deferred. 18 year old are likely to be in
touch with in interests of 16 and 17 year
olds.
www.politicalpromise.co.uk

UK's number one student politics website