Democracy Flashcards
Direct democracy
In which individuals express their opinions themselves.
System originated in ancient Athens, where adult male citizens had the right to take part in decision making at public meetings. Clearly such a syst would not be practical as a reg means of decision-making in a large modern state
Representative democracy
In which people elect representatives who take decisions on their behalf. This is the usual form of democ in the modern world.
Representatives do not act as delegates , merely taking instructions from the voters. They are expected to exercise their judgement. If they do not satisfy voters, they can be held to account and removed at the next election.
Advantages of direct democracy
Gives equal weight to all votes, unlike a rep syst where the varying sizes of constituencies mean that votes do not all have equal value.
Encourages popular participation in politics by expecting people to take their duties as citizens seriously
Removes the need for trusted representatives, as people can take responsibility for their own decisions
Develops a sense of community and encourages genuine debate
Disadvantages of direct democracy
Impractical in a large, heavily populated modern state where the decision making is complicated
Many people will not want to- or feel qualified to- take part in decision-making, so pol activists decide what happens
Open to manipulation by the cleverest and most articulate speakers, who will persuade people to support their viewpoint
Will of the majority is not mediated by parliamentary institutions, so minority views are disregarded
Advantages of representative democracy
The only practical syst in a large modern system, where issues are complex and often need a rapid response (for example the deployment of troops)
Politicians form parties, bringing coherence and giving people a real choice of representation. PG form to represent different interests, promoting debate and encouraging pluralist democracy.
Reduce chances of minority rights being overridden by ‘tyranny of the majority’
Elections hold people to hold representatives to account
Politicians are (in theory) better informed than the average citizen ab the many issues on which they must take a view
Disadvantages of rep dem
May lead to reduced participation as people choose to hand responsibility to politicians
Parties and pressure groups are often run by elites pursuing their own agendas, not truly rep the people
Minorities may still find themselves under-represented as politicians are more likely to follow the views of the majority to secure election
Politicians are skilful in avoiding accountability, especially as gen elecs are usually 5 years apart in the UK
Politcians may be corrupt and incompetent, may betray election promises or put loyalty to their party before responsibility to the electorate
Instances where direct democracy can be used in a rep system
National refs
The 2015 Recall of MPs Act- allows a petition be triggered if an MP is sentenced to be imprisoned or is suspended from HoC for more than 21 days. If 10% of eligible voters in the constit sign the petition- by-election is called. Direct dem is used to hold representatives to account.
Pos features of UK pol syst
Devolved govs and elected mayors- enabling more dec to be made closer to the local people
Independent judiciary- sep from other branches of gov, upholds the rule of law and protects a wide range of personal freedom
Free media challenges gov pol and exposes the misdeeds of pols
Free and fair elections- largely free of corruption and intimidation, in recent years supplemented by OPPs to vote in refs
Wide range of pol parties and pressure groups
Arguments for UK being in a democratic deficit
Under-rep of minority viewpoints due to voting system- FPTP + 2party syst
HoL lacks dem legitimacy - wholly unelected… greater part of its membership has been appointed by successive PMs, w/ small numbers chosen by other party leaders and non-party ‘crossbench’ peers nom since 2000 by an indep House of Lords appointment commission… ensures a no of diff professions and fields are rep
Lack of protection for citizen rights- ECHR encorp into UK law by 1998 HRA, provs inadequate guarentee for the rights of citizens in their rel of state. Govs can ‘derogate from’ articles of the HRA, parts no longer have legal auth in certain situations
Control of sections of the media by wealthy, unaccountable business interests… for example the Murdoch group has owned a no of British newspapers simultaneously including the Times, the Sunday Ties, the Sun
Wide belief that the UK’s dem syst suffers from a ‘participation crisis’ due to lack of engagement w/ the pol syst among a sig section of the pop
Turnout
Falling turnou is imp because it means that govs are elected on a reduced share of pop vote, calling strength of mandate into q
Av turnout at general elections elecs from 1945-1997 was 76%
2019 in UK 67.3%
2017 68.8%
Turnout = even lower in ‘second order’ elections Dev + Corn PCC 18.8%
Feb 2017 stoke-on-Trent by-election 38.2 % turnout, 2015 gen elec 49.9 % turnout
Party membership
Indication of participation crisis. Only 1.6% of the electorate now belongs to one of the main three pol parties, 1983 3.8%
Labour memb= 366,604, drop from Corbyn era
Cons 172,437, drop from 400,000 in mid 1990s
LD 90,000 +
Incr in memb of smaller parties
Is there a crisis in participation?
PG + protests… direct action incr, trad pol failing?
Emergence of Soc media… exchange of pol beliefs
Political apathy- lack of interest or awareness of contemporary events and pol issues
Political hapathy (mix of happiness and apathy)- ppl are gen contented and see no push for pol change… unusually low participation in 2001 and 2005
Participation depends on the issue at stake… Scot indep ref 84.6%, Brexit 72.2%
Neg public perception of pols in recent decades… explain declining voter turnout and incr int in alt types of pol activity. Ex of dishonest behaviour by MPs and broken electoral pol, together w/ gen sense that voting does not change anything has red levels of trust in dem pol
Reforming the system
Changing the day for elecs from Thursday to the weekend, as in mainland Europe
Allowing ppl to vote anywhere in their constituency, rather than insisting on attendance at a particular polling station
Allowing voting to take place over several days
Postal voting however incr electoral fraud including multiple voting and intimidation + voters disliked being deprived of other means.
E-voting but probs of cyber attacks and the possibility of online impersonation of voters, Access to technology = discriminatory against older people + poorer voters
Reducing voting to 16 as in scot
Voting made compulsory advantages
Voting is a social duty as well as a right; people should be engaged in the processes that affect their lives
It would produce a parl that is more representative of the pop as a whole
Pol would have to run better quality campaigns, and govs would have to frame their policies with the whole electorate in mind
Voters are not obliged for one of the candidates if they conscientiously cannot do so; it would still be legal to spoils one ballots paper, or none of the above box could be added
Voting should remain voluntary
In a preferential system, where voters number candidates in order, compulsory voting might lead to participants ranking in order
Undemocratic to force someone to take part in something which should be a choice
Not stop pol focusing their campaign on marginal seats and neglecting safe seats where the outcome is predictable
Compulsory voting does not address the deeper reasons why people decide not to vote
