Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Representative democracy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Representative democracy
In this essay I will be analyzing the role of diversity in democracy, I will start with direct and representative democracy’s, then continue onto the primary focus of this essay which will be the analysis of an essay by Joshua Cohen, I will conclude by raising some of my issues with deliberative democracy and the solutions required to allow the maximum amount of diversity.
In order to discuss how we may represent diversity in democracy, we must first make some distinctions between the different types of democracy. Democracy is any system of government that is controlled by the people. The first form of democracy was direct democracy, this was when citizens would gather and directly vote on their preferred legislation, this method fell out of
By the end of the section he has established three main features of his a deliberative democracy, and why Rawls theory is inadequate at providing an explanation as to why these three features would be desirable under the ideal of a fair system of cooperation. He proceeds to the second section of his essay where he actually begins to formulate his ideal of a deliberative democracy. The deliberative democracy is basically a system in which citizens are all given equal value and allowed to argue in favor of their preferred society. The institutions of this society are only recognized insofar as they are enabling the public deliberation, and citizens have a commitment to the resolution of issues via collective choosing through public reasoning. He formally conceptualizes his deliberative democracy as having five main features (Cohen, 1997,
This procedure has three primary aspects, that it be free, that it be reasoned and finally, that we reach a consensus. We need to be able to decide on an agenda, propose alternate solutions to problems within the agenda, support those solutions with reason, and then conclude by settling on the alternative. Outcomes are democratically legitimate only if they are free, reasoned and consensual. This is the principle captured by an ideal deliberative procedure.
The first general aspect is that deliberation must be free, and it can only be free while satisfying two criteria. Firstly, participants are bound by the results of the deliberation, and their judgment is unimpeded by the authority of prior authority or requirements. Secondly, participants must have the ability to act in accordance with any result, as the fact that the result was arrived at via deliberation is sufficient reason to comply with it (Cohen, 1997,
1. Janda, Kenneth. The Challenge of Democracy. Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston, MA. 1999. (Chapter 3 & 4).
Bessette, Joseph M., John J. Pitney, and First Jr. American Government And Politics, Deliberation, Democracy, And Citizenship No Seperate Policy Chapters Editions. Boston: Wadsworth Pub Co, 2010. 429. Print.
The founding principles of democracy are the will of the people and the rule of law. The former meaning that the citizens' beliefs, desires, etc. are translated into the government. The latter meaning that all individuals have equality under the law and that each individual has equal influence; this is frequently interpreted into the idea of one person, one vote (Garner, 2009). A third principle may be added to first two meta-principles as an offshoot, that the government must be transparent in its functions to achieve true democrac...
William Smith, Democracy, Deliberation and Disobedience (Paper presented at the UK Association for Legal and Social Philosophy Annual Conference, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, April 2003).
Before pondering the extent of democracy one must determine what the term “democracy” means. Democracy is a “means of selecting policymakers and of organizing government so that policy represents and responds to citizens’ preferences.”i[i] The traditional democratic theory further explains the ideas behind democracy. The five aspects of this theory are that one man equals one vote, there is good voter-turnout, citizens can obtain knowledge through free speech and press, the general public controls government agenda, and an extension of all rights to all citizens.ii[ii] From this, one could say a true democracy would submit every bill to the public for a popular vote, like the traditional town meetings of old New England where all eligible voters met to have their say in governmental agenda.iii[iii] One could also say that democracy implies protection of rights and equal rights for all. Or, as Abraham Lincoln said, a democracy is “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.”iv[iv] The people make the government, they have a say in the agenda, and the government governs by the people’s consent. This ...
Famously, John Rawls is regarded as using reflective equilibrium (RE) to justify his principles of justice. But the point of justification by RE in Rawls's more recent work is not easily established since he regards his own work as still contractarian. In order to clarify matters, I distinguish between wide and narrow RE, as well as show that wide RE consists of several kinds of narrow RE: RE as a plea for (re)consideration, RE as a constructive procedure of choice, and safe ground RE. The connection of these REs is shown in order to reach justification. The point of introducing RE for justification is seen in opening the range of possible revisions to allow for consensus. However, (the lack of) wide RE for itself is not enough to bring about revision. Rather, an additional causal link between two kinds of RE is proposed to be necessary.
Each day, billions of people throughout the world affirm their commitment to a specific idea; to be part of a society. While this social contract is often overlooked by most citizens, their agreement to it nevertheless has far-reaching consequences. Being a member of society entails relinquishing self-autonomy to a higher authority, whose aim should be to promote the overall good of the populace. While making this decision to become part of a commonwealth is usually performed without explicit deliberation, there is a common consensus amongst philosophers that something unique to the human experience is the driving force behind this decision. Contained within this something are highly contested points of debate amongst both past and contemporary political philosophers. Two such philosophers are Thomas Hobbes and Thomas Aquinas. Each of these political writers provide detailed arguments regarding the concept of natural law, the role that reason plays in this law, whether some laws are considered truly rational, and why some people choose not to follow certain principles even when they recognize them to be rational. By analyzing each of these arguments, we will arrive at the conclusion that even though the rational principles that reason provides us can easily be disregarded by the populace, that we can still find a common good within promulgating rational doctrine.
In this particular case, or any other cases that may occur in the future, further research can be accomplished by identifying the boundaries for each argument. Sometimes the issues are so closely related that the solution becomes difficult to distinguish. Other times, evaluating the opinions of others helps to gain a broad consensus of what the majority desires. With this further research, there could be a better understanding of individual’s opposing thoughts, which could help establish a common ground and a solution to different cases.
Barry, Brian. "Is Democracy Special?" in Philosophy, Politics, & Society, 5th Series, ed. Peter Laslett & James Fishkin. Hew Haven: Yale University Press, 1979.
The first ideal concept from the constitution is a representative democracy. A representative democracy is a system where the citizens elect officials to serve on their behalf. A representative democracy is a form of “Republicanism”(Marks;9/8,16). This form of democracy shouldn’t be mistaken with direct democracy. Where all of the citizens vote on public policies and what the country does. On the
Lastly Mills highlights how a truly democratic state can be achieved. There is a need for a public that acts a medium for true political change, skilled men who form the higher powers of the state and have no vested corporate interests, dependable parties that debate openly and lucidly the problems faced by the world and finally liberated institutions between the public and the elite that act as proponent for the public opinion.
Abstract: Which political and juridical foundation can justify the transit from the Western, particular, to the universal? John Rawls tries to answer this question in his article, "The Law of Peoples," proposing a kind of contract or agreement. A first agreement should be attained among liberal-democratic societies on a few political and social issues such as human rights. Then this agreement can be widened to non-liberal/democratic but well organized hierarchical societies or those that satisfy the requisites of being peaceful, of having a reasonably well organized legal system, of admitting a measure of freedom-political and religious-and of admitting the right of emigration. These two groups of nations would belong to a Society of Nations with the juridical and political duty of fulfilling the few political issues that have been previously accepted. But Rawls' proposal overcomes neither eurocentrism nor western-centrism. It seems that the first circle of liberal democratic nations would decide which peoples satisfy the requirements of the 'well organized hierarchical societies.' This second circle of nations are only invited peoples; they are not supposed to contribute new proposals, but only to accept the proposals of the liberal-democratic nations. I present a new effort to attain human rights through a true universal dialogue in which the representatives of all cultures and peoples can equally speak, make proposals, and listen or accept the proposals of others.
...influences on the stakeholders and evaluating various arguments, one is able to formulate a solution that will result in the best possible outcome.
More specific arguments originate from the participatory theory of democracy and the critique of a lack of responsiveness and legitimacy of representative (party) democracy. The two sets of democratic institutions are distinguished by basic features of direct participation: (1) direct democracy focuses on specific issues, in contrast to voting on candidates and general programs for long terms of office, and (2) citizens themselves act as decision makers rather than delegating these powers. Like electoral systems, a variety of procedural forms, designs, and regulations are likely to influence processes and outcome. One must also keep in mind that direct-democratic processes cannot operate in isolation but are always linked to the structures of an overall political system that includes major representative institutions. Thus, interactions between the two types of institutions will be an important challenge for analysis. For instance, as George Tsebelis notes, referendum voters can be seen as an additional veto player. Some authors contend that direct democracy may undermine representative democracy, while others focus on the deliberative functions for a democratic public sphere and the capacity for integrating citizens in the democratic process. One can also assume that basic
In American history, the elements of the American liberal democratic tradition that were most relevant in the society were individual freedom, economic freedom, equality, and democracy. Liberal democracy refers to the people being the rulers with guarantees of individual freedom and equality and that it focuses on individual liberty as an essential to protecting that liberty. The two biggest challenges that liberal democracy faces are one balancing equality and liberty and the other is balancing the government’s needs for individual freedom and legitimacy. Liberal democracy plays a major role in our society to limit government power in interfering with liberty while as it ensures that the government protects liberties. The elements of