Democracy & Participation: Key Points 2022 - 2023 Flashcards
Democracy
- people power
- decisions are made by the people
- the government is accountable to the people
- all are equal
- there is freedom of information
- began in ancient Greece (Athens)
Legitimacy
- government has a right to power in a democracy (because of elections)
- regime in Iran claims legitimacy because of Islamic teachings
Direct democracy
- people (not politicians) actively make decisions themselves (eg. referendums, initiatives, citizens’ juries, Athenian democracy)
- not an election
- 2015 Recall of MP’s Act
Direct democracy (PROS)
- disperses power away from professional politicians
- increases participation and debate
- ‘pure’ democracy
- increases legitimacy of decisions
- more information available (internet) so voters are better informed
- less confidence in politicians
- all votes count equally (unlike First Past The Post)
Direct democracy (CONS)
- issues too complex for people to understand
- often an emotional response from voters (often made worse by media)
- too much power to wealthy groups who can distort the debate
- tyranny of majority
- politicians are experts, let them decide
- low turnout reduces legitimacy
- can become an opinion poll on popularity of government
- impractical in a large heavily populated state
Representative democracy
Politicians are elected to represent voters
Features of representative democracy
- free and fair elections
- representatives are accountable
- representatives sit in legislation and represent the voters
- there are political parties and pressure groups to represent people
Representative democracy (PROS)
- more practical than lots of referendums
- government by ‘experts’
- that’s what we elect politicians for
- representatives are accountable so usually act responsibly
- representatives can act for the benefit of whole of society
Representative democracy (CONS in the UK)
- FPTP means parties are not fairly represented
- Lords are unelected
- small parties do badly
- possibility of an elective dictatorship
- rule by elites
- whips distort democracy
- mad for minorities
- reduces participation
Features of Liberal Democracy
- frequent and fair elections
- power is separated so no-one becomes too powerful (elective dictatorship)
- checks and balances (each branch controls the power of others)
- strong civil liberties (e.g. freedom of speech)
- diversity and tolerance
independent judiciary
Features of Pluralist Democracy
- frequent and fair elections
- power is separated so no-one becomes too powerful (elective dictatorship)
- checks and balances (each branch controls the power of others)
- strong civil liberties (e.g. freedom of speech)
- diversity and tolerance
independent judiciary - lots of different political parties and pressure groups
- power is widely dispersed (not concentrated, e.g. devolution)
- government makes decisions having listened to the ideas and contrasting arguments from competing groups and organisations
Features of Parliamentary Democracy
THIS IS THE UK
- frequent and fair elections
- power is separated so no-one becomes too powerful (elective dictatorship)
- checks and balances (each branch controls the power of others)
- strong civil liberties (e.g. freedom of speech)
- diversity and tolerance
independent judiciary - lots of different political parties and pressure groups
- power is widely dispersed (not concentrated, e.g. devolution)
- government makes decisions having listened to the ideas and contrasting arguments from competing groups and organisations
- parliamentary is sovereign (has ultimate power)
- Government is drawn from Parliament (all Ministers are MPs or peers)
People participate by:
- voting
- joining a party
- joining a pressure group
- standing for election
- making views known (e.g. letter writing / internet)
Is there a participation / legitimacy crisis?
LOW TURNOUT
- turnout in 2019 was 67% up from low point of 51% in 2001, but still well below 84% in 1950
FALLING PARTY MEMBERSHIP
- except Labour at first under Corbyn but then fell away, Greens and SNP)
- disillusionment with politicians
Causes of a participation / legitimacy crisis:
- behaviour of politicians (e.g. expenses scandal)
- media influence
- consensus politics (‘all the same’?)
- FPTP
- cultural changes in society
- declining community spirit
Positive aspects of UK democracy
- free parties and variety of pressure groups
- government has a clear mandate to govern
- strong rights
- independent judiciary
- MPs represent constituents
- free media
- referendums
Democratic deficit
A deficiency or problem in the ay democracy works (e.g. poor accountability)
Negative aspects of UK democracy
- Lords are unelected
- elective dictatorship (government too strong, Parliament too weak)
- EU too powerful?
- FPTP
- small parties are under-represented
- low turnout in elections
- party membership declining (except Greens and SNP)
- disillusionment amongst voters
- lack of protection for citizens’ rights
- powerful media controlled by wealthy elite
Possible improvements to democracy:
- elected Lords
- introduce a codified constitution
- BREXIT might bring more subsidiarity
- more devolution for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
- reducing MPs to 600
- introduced PR
- strengthening power of Parliament
- ‘re-calling’ MPs who are failing
- votes at 16
- compulsory voting
- more referendums
- digital democracy
- citizens’ juries
Widening of the franchise (vote)
1832 Great Reform Act
- got rid of ‘rotten boroughs’
- new urban areas got seats
- gave vote to male middle class
1918
- all men over 21
- all women 30
1928
- all over 21
1969
- all over 18
Suffragists
- mainly middle class
- believed in non-violent persuasion (peaceful demonstrations, petitions)
Suffragettes
- working class and middle class
- militant tactics (e.g. hunger strikes)
Extend vote to 16?
HISTORY
- ‘Votes at 16 Coalition’ was formed in 2013 to press for change
- success in Scottish independence in 2014, and for Scottish Parliament elections in 2015
- Conservatives opposed so no change for UK general elections
Extend vote to 16?
YES
- can marry, leave school, start work
- would increase participation
- parties would need to pay attention to the youth issues
Extend vote to 16?
NO
- lack of life experience
- very few other countries permit it
- lack maturity (just follow parents)
Should voting be compulsory (like Australia)?
YES
- high turnout would increase legitimacy
- politicians would need to cater for all sections of society (improve education)
- voting is a civic duty
Should voting be compulsory (like Australia)?
NO
- against civil liberties
- many voters are not well-informed
- expensive to administer
What is a pressure group?
- organised group
- united by a cause or topic
- who wish to influence the government / public opinion
- an important part of representative democracy
Sectional groups
- mainly concerned with the interests of a section (often economic interests) e.g. NFU, CBI, BMA, and all trade unions
- some groups are hybrid (i.e a bit of both sectional and promotional groups) e.g. AA (Automobile Association)
Promotional or Cause groups
- promote a cause which they believe benefits the whole of society (not just a section) e.g. Greenpeace, RSPCA, Liberty)
- some groups are hybrid (i.e a bit of both sectional and promotional groups) e.g. AA (Automobile Association)
Insider groups
- have a close working relationship with government
- consulted regularly
- may even help to draft legislation
- e.g. CBI, BMA, NFU
Outsider groups
- have few or no links to government
- not consulted
- often less successful that insiders
- more independent and free to act as they wish
- e.g. Greenpeace, Plane Stupid, CND
Functions of PGs
- representation of views
- inform and educate
- help government make decisions (have expertise)
- encourage political participation between elections
- sectional groups protect the interests of their members
Difference between PGs and Parties
- parties seek power (fight elections) VS PGs just influence
- PGs have a narrow focus VS parties have policies on everything
- parties seek good of country as a whole VS PGs just accountable to their members only
Similaritiesbetween PGs and Parties
- some PGs offer candidates at elections
- some parties have narrow aims (e.g. UKIP)
- some PGs become parties (e.g. Green Party started off as a PG)
PG aims
- influence decisions
- affect legislation
- raise awareness
- mobilize public
- defend their members
PG methods
- influence decision makers (lobby ministers and MPs, e.g. NFU)
- affect legislation to committees in Parliament, e.g. ASH
- raise public awareness (organise media campaign, petitions, publicity stunts, e.g. Greenpeace, RSPCA, Black Lives Matter)
- mobilise public opinion (organise demonstrations, civil disobedience, celebrity endorsements, e.g. NUS (tuition fees), trade unions, Plane Stupid, Extinction Rebellion)
- defend members (use courts to defend rights, e.g. Stonewall = gay rights, Age UK = to prevent age discrimination)
What are the two perspectives of the power of PGs?
Pluralism and elitism
Pluralism
- good for democracy / society
- numerous PGs to express views
- governments listen to PGs
- No one PG dominates
- PGs often balance each other out and balance is dispersed or shared out
Elitism
- bad for democracy / society
- only a few elite groups really matter and they dominate
- some PGs are very powerful and manipulative
- governments ignore most PGs
- power is held by the few (who often control media)
What factors determine PG success?
- resources (money and organisation)
- insider status
- tactics
- sharing same aims as government
- lack of opposition
- favourable circumstances
- celebrity involvement
How does the following factor (resources: money and organisation) determine PG success?
- E.G. Countryside Alliance watered down anti fox-hunting laws in 2004
How does the following factor insider status) determine PG success?
E.G. ASH helped to produce anti-smoking laws
How does the following factor (tactics) determine PG success?
E.G. Save England’s Forests Campaign used a variety of tactics (e.g. petitions, celebrity campaign) to government to cancel plans to sell off forests in 2010
How does the following factor (sharing same aims as government) determine PG success?
E.G. CBI very happy when Cameron was elected in 2010 and 2015 because Cameron reduced corporation tax on company profits
How does the following factor (lack of opposition) determine PG success?
E.G. Make Poverty History - Cameron government increased overseas aid
How does the following factor (favourable circumstances) determine PG success?
E.G. time was right for ASH to get smoking ban (studies had shown that a ban led to reductions in lung cancer)
How does the following factor (celebrity involvement) determine PG success?
E.G.
- Gurkha Justice Campaign led by Dame Joanna Lumley
- Free School Meals campaign led 2020 lead by footballer Marcus Rashford MBE
- Raheem Sterlin MBE for Racial Equality Campaign
7 case studies for PGs
1) BMA gets government to ban smoking in cars carrying children
2) Occupy London Movement 2011 outside St Paul’s fails to weaken capitalist system but does succeed in getting publicity for the cause
3) Extinction Rebellion (XR) various campaigns and demonstrations 2020-22
4) Black Lives Matter various campaigns and demonstrations 2020-21 (a social movement not a pressure group)
5) Sarah Everard Vigil 2022
6) Insulate Britain
7) The campaign to free Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffee
Have PGs grown in importance?
YES
- numbers have increased
- membership has increased
- high profile now
- some big successes
- larger number of access points (governments, MPs, local government, courts, civil service, EU, etc.)
Have PGs grown in importance?
NO
- PGs can only influence, government has power and final say
- information overload in media, many now support PGs but in a passive way
- more PGs fail than succeed (more access points does not necessarily mean more success)
Do PGs enhance or damage democracy?
ENHANCE
- PGs represent groups often ignored by parties, e.g. Shelter
- PGs disperse power /pluralism / stops elective dictatorship
- educate
- provide advice and expertise to government
- PGs help people to participate and provide outlet for public grievances (‘tension release’)
Do PGs enhance or damage democracy?
DAMAGE
- can undermine elected politicians (e.g. Junior Doctors 2016) / not legitimate
- self-interested and selfish
- too powerful / elitism / wealth wins
- civil disobedience (an attack on law and order)
Think tanks
- groups of experts who offer solutions to political, social and economic issues
- E.G. Centre for Policy Studies (right wing), Institute for Public Policy Research left wing), ResPublica (neutral)
Lobbyists
- people paid by clients to seek to influence decision making (e.g. Central Lobby Consultants Ltd.)
Corporations
- have considerable political influence (e.g. banks, media groups, motor manufacturers)
E.G.
- 2016 Government promises Nissan it will not lose out after Brexit
- revolving door syndrome
Rights in the UK examples`
- free speech
- freedom of religion
- right to vote
Rights in the UK have developed through the following:
- Magna Carta 1215 (limited royal power, introduced trial by jury and rule of law)
- European Convention on Human Rights 1950 (UK citizens can appeal to the European Court of Human Rights if rights are infringed)
- Human Rights Act 1998 (incorporated the Convention into UK law)
- Freedom of Information Act 2000 (gives citizens the right to view info about themselves
- The Equality Act 2010 (identified 9 protected characteristics such as age and disability, and outlawed discrimination)
Are rights well-protected in the UK?
1)
- HRA and ECHR codifies and protects rights and rights are protected by common law
- there is a ‘rights-based culture’ (i.e. all new laws must comply with HRA)
- Judges can declare Acts incompatible with the HRA through judicial review
BUT
- Parliament is still sovereign and Conservatives might get rid of it eventually)
- Parliament can pass new legislation to weaken rights
- there is no codified constitution
2)
- Through judicial review
- in 200, there were 4,240 reviews whereas today it is over 15,000 (e.g. Gurkha ruling 2008, Max Mosely privacy case 2008, Abu Qatada case)
BUT
- judges cannot be proactive in protecting rights (have to wait for cases to come before the courts)
3)
- increasing independence of judges means they are more willing to speak out to protect rights
BUT
- equally many politicians have become more assertive in attacking judicial decisions especially in the light of the terror threat (need to curb rights to protect national security?)
4)
- judges are unbiased and neutral
BUT
- still largely white, male and middle class
- two white females on SC (Lady Rose and Lady Arden)
- no ethnic minorities on SC
5)
- after 9/11 and 7/7, the Government saw counter-terrorism as a top priority so introduced anti-terror measures which limited civil liberties in the interests of protecting the wider community
- e.g. detention of suspected foreign nationals
- opposed by courts
- Blair tried to extend the period a suspect could be held without charge from 14 to 90 days but this was defeated in the House of Commons
2 civil liberties PGs
1) Liberty
- pressured the government to drop plans for compulsory ID cards, but failed in 2013 to stop the government introduced ‘secret courts’ which try terrorist suspects without all the evidence against them being disclosed
2) Howard League for Penal Reform
- has struggled to get government to protect the rights of prisoners (e.g. right to vote)
- although, they did get the government to allow prisoners’ families the right to send them books
