Democracy and Participation Flashcards
1
Q
Explain direct democracy
A
All citizens express their opinions themselves + not through a representative e.g referendums
2
Q
Explain representative democracy
A
People select representatives to act on their behalf + exercise their political choice - more modern
3
Q
What are the advantages and disadvantages of direct democracy?
A
Advantages:
* Increases political participation
* Less chance for comprimise with voting - can choose with each issue
* Decisions tend to be agreed with by the majority of the public
Disadvantages:
* Less impact per vote
* Takes time for political change
* Meida has a large impact - can advertise false information
4
Q
What are the advantages and disadvantages of representative democracy?
A
Advantages:
* Ease of use - people choose experts to make informed decisions on matters
* More flexible in making ammendments in what politicans promised
Disadvantages:
* Have to make comprimises with what representative to choose as not all with have an individual’s stance on the same issues
* Representatives may not follow through on their promised policies during campaigns
* Decrease in political participation
5
Q
Explain pluralist democracy
A
Positive version of representative democracy - power is spread throughout different groups - shown by the existance of politial parties + pressure groups
6
Q
Explain the two types representatives
A
- Delegate model: representatives is given direct instructions by the people
- Trustee model: representative is chosen for their ability to make decisions - Burkean model
7
Q
What are the key rules for referendums?
A
- Referendums tend to focus on large constitutional changes
- There’s always two clear sides to the referendum
- The government must be for the change proposition
8
Q
Reasons For Referendums
A
- An exercise in direct democracy; they engage the national public in political debates and decision-making
- Politicians being aware that the public will have a direct say in the decision made means that they come up with proposals which are politically sustainable
- Ensure there’s a broad base of political support for a controversial decision + ‘lock in’ a decision and allow for any unpopular consequences to be forced; binds a present or future government to the policy
- People are more likely to support the use of referendums if they expect a majority to share in their position; referendums can be seen as essential to achieving a desired policy
- Settle highly controversial issues
- Objectively decide on issues in a way general elections don’t; in general elections voters make broad political choices of what the parties + their leaders will do on many issues rather than specific issues
- Referendums raise the issue as an open + public debate allowing voters to become educated on the issue through public meetings, the media etc
- Referendums are a check on the government + ensure that key changes only occur with public support; the public is much less trusting of the government
- Increases support for the political system
9
Q
Reasons Aganist Referendums
A
- Gives room to both sides to portray one idea as the status quo and the proposed change as a false one + they seduce voters with false promises that aren’t always true
- Engage voters who have little information about the issue, making them much more susceptible to false information
- Referendums can be savagely divisive, especially when the possibility of narrow victories can force campaigners to use every argument at their disposal
- Politicians who have the power to call for referendums tend to only do so if they’re in the majority, may suffer from the ‘false consensus effect’ where they believe they have more support than they do + lose the referendum due to their false projections
- When referendums are called + supported under wrong assumptions about the majority position, the results often aren’t accepted as legitimate + so don’t resolve political conflicts
- A referendum cannot replace participatory, informed and deliberative decision-making but is instead a ‘procedural shortcut’ that misses the goal of a democratically legitimate + broadly accepted decision
- Referendums are too simplistic; people vote once on issues with no responsibility to engage in political debate - in parliament, new laws are voted on multiple times in both houses + there are extensive debates and revisions
- Referendums undermine Parliamentary democracy + sovereignty ( in which Parliament alone decides the law)
- Referendums also delay decisions which politicians should be making
- Referendums often oversimplify complex considerations + campaigns often have simple questions whose wording can also highly impact the outcome of the vote
- There are often unequal resources between the opposing campaigns in a referendum so that the electorate becomes submerged in one side of the argument; the media also has an impact
- Referendums are often a display of a majoritarian form of voting + minorities can lose out as a result, if the turnout is low then it’s not reflective of public views; if referendums are done much more frequently, on not just constitutional issues, then turnout often drops as it has been in Switzerland
- If referendums become much more frequent then there is a threat of paralysis of government
- The implication of the result isn’t always clear; referendums after a government has just won a large majority display a large vote of confidence in the government + if the government is unpopular they can be used to punish the government
10
Q
Explain the Representation of the People’s Act
A
- Gave the vote to all working-class men
- Mainly due to the argument that many of the armed forces weren’t property owners + couldn’t then vote in the country they were sacrifing their life for
- Women 30 or over who owned property or husbands owned property were also given the right to vote
11
Q
Who were the suffragists and what did their work involve?
A
- Suffragists = they wanted to achieve rights for women through the constitution - help public meetings + petitioned their MPs
- They formed the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies (NUWSS) - a collection of regional women right groups with no political party allegiances
- Led by Milicent Fawcett
12
Q
Who were the suffragettes and what did their work involve?
A
- Suffragettes = they wanted to achieve women’s rights and votes through protests and violence
- They formed the WPSU, and membership was only granted to women, they felt that peaceful tactics seemed to be exhausted + a more radical apporach was needed
- Led by Emmeline Pankurst
13
Q
Were the suffragettes terrorists?
A
- Argubly the suffragettes were terrorists as they unlawfully used violence aganist citizens to get women the vote
- However, the social order at the time was very different + all major social chance requries some militancy + the women also had no other real way to advocate
- The suffragettes wouldn’t be viewed as modern-day terrorists, as there is a distinction between modern-day terrorism + lawlessness
14
Q
How did the government react to the suffragettes?
A
- The government generally disregarded the suffragettes pleas + ensured that they took a hard line on the violence by arresting them + placing them in horrifc conditions whilst in prison
- 1913 ‘Cat and Mouse Act’ -
- many women would go on hunger strike in prison, and the government decided they would be force fed so that the didn’t become martyrs
- The act meant that women who became ill due to their hunger stikes would be temporarily released, until they began to eat + got better, before being re-arrested and sent to prison
- The suffragettes stopped their work during the war in exhnage for the government releasing all WPSU prisoners who had been arrested for protesting
- WW1 led to a change in the perception of gender roles and eventually helped to led to the Representation of the People’s Act - giving some women the vote
15
Q
What arguments are the arguments for a reduced voting age?
A
- Earlier acess to voting increases voter particpation throughout people’s lives
- 16-year-olds already have personal autonomy - they can consent to sexual relationships, join the military etc
- Some 16-year-olds may also pay taxes which leads to the problem of ‘taxation without representation’
- If 16-year-olds had the vote there would be an increase in political education
- Politicans would be forced to focus on youth issues; such as bullying and mental health issues
- 15 year-olds can be Party members such as the Conservative Party; so they can help pick the Prime Minister but not vote
- There is no maximum voting age; by having a minimum voting age democracy has become structuraly unbalanced
16
Q
What argumens are there aganist a reduced voting age?
A
- Adulthood is reached at 18
- Young people may be overly influenced or manipulated by other; parents or social media
- People don’t support lowering it; YouGov poll of 3017 51% opposed and 26% supported it
- Lack of life experience + maturity to make informed and responisbiresponsible voting decisions
- Inconsistend Age thresholds; to drink, smoke, gamble, be on a jury you need to be 18
- In the long-term the same trend of low voter participation may just be extended to 16+17 year-olds
