1. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power Louise Francis
AND THE STATE
DEMOCRACY, PARTICIPATION
2. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
3. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Activity 3.1:
Brutes, Liberals and the Leviathan
1. How do social contract theorists justify the existence of
government? What is their view of 'human nature’?
2. What does 'liberal' mean when describing a liberal
democracy? What are liberal democracies' key features?
3. Summarise the key differences between the liberal, neo-
pluralist and New Right views of the State.
4. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
5. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
6. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Political Participation
7. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Activity 3.1 continued…
4. Is extensive political participation a warning sign for a
liberal democracy, or an indicator of its health? Why?
To get you thinking further…..
How does Laverack define ‘activism’ and the differentiation between
conventional and unconventional strategies?
Define the different types of power and describe the relevance for health
promotion and ‘control of destiny’ (from Module 1)?
What is ‘hegemonic power’ and why might challenging it be important for
public health?
8. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Activity 3.2: Representative Democracy
1. Proportional representation (e.g. Legislative Council)
2. Majoritarian preferential voting (e.g. Legislative
Assembly)
After accessing websites (and other sources if needed) -
what are the implications of these different systems in
relation to the political make-up of the different houses.
9. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Next week: Neoliberalism and Social
Protection
What are the key value systems and policy contexts in
which our societies function?
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
10. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Key concepts
Direct/Participatory democracy
Indirect/Representative democracy
Liberal democracy
Authoritarian government
11. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Module 4: Democracy, Participation and the State
Health Partnerships, Politics and Power
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
Questions & comments
12. Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code 00301J
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Copyright Regulation 1969
WARNING
This material has been copied and communicated to
you by or on behalf of Curtin University of
Technology pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act
1968 (the Act)
The material in this communication may be subject to
copyright under the Act. Any further copying or
communication of this material by you may be the
subject of copyright protection under the Act.
Do not remove this notice
Editor's Notes
1
If we take it as a given that public health is political then we need to delve into political structures and the development of governments. We now turn to exploring some of the concepts that underpin our particular form of government in Australia - a liberal democracy. The comparison of different political structures and governments is a useful way to gain clarity about the strengths and weaknesses of different systems, broaden our understanding and shine a fresh light on our own governmental processes.
For our purposes we will look at two broad classifications of government with a hybrid in between (described
in Table 1).
Liberal democracies are likely the most familiar and Australia is included in this category
(Hague and Harro, 2013). In this system, rulers are chosen through free, fair and regular elections. There is
universal suffrage (all or nearly all citizens are entitled to vote) and those running for election will often join
political parties that coalesce around similar belief systems or ideologies and this assists voters in making
their choice. In addition, an independent media provides information to citizens before and during election
campaigns in order for them to make an enlightened choice. The inclusion of the term liberal in liberal
democracy refers to the limits placed on these governments by their constitutions that protect individual
rights (or liberties) such as freedom of assembly, property, religion and speech. These protections are
enforced through independent courts.
The other main form of governments are authoritarian regimes. These forms of governments are neither
democractic nor liberal; citizens have very little capacity to control their rulers. If elections do occur the
choice may be artifically constricted or large sections of the population may be excluded from participating.
Those who rule may control the media and there may be little communication between them and those ruled
(Hague and Harro, 2013).
The classic argument in favour of government is found in social-contract
theories, first proposed by seventeenth-century philosophers like Thomas
Hobbes (see p. 111) and John Locke (see p. 255). Social-contract theory, in fact,
constitutes the basis of modern political thought. In Leviathan ([1651] 1968),
Hobbes advanced the view that rational human beings should respect and obey
their government because without it society would descend into a civil war 'of
every man against every man: Social-contract theorists develop their argument
with reference to an assumed or hypothetical society without government, a socalled
'state of nature: Hobbes graphically described life in the state of nature as
being 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short: In his view, human beings were
essentially power-seeking and selfish creatures, who would, if unrestrained by
law, seek to advance their own interests at the expense of fellow humans. Even
the strongest would never be strong enough to live in security and without fear:
the weak would unite against them before turning on one another. Quite simply,
without government to restrain selfish impulses, order and stability would be
impossible. Hobbes suggested that, recognizing this, rational individuals would
seek to escape from chaos and disorder by entering into an agreement with one
another, a 'social contract: through which a system of government could be
established.
Social-contract theorists see government as a necessary defence against evil
and barbarity, their view of human nature being essentially pessimistic. An alternative
tradition exists, however, which portrays government as intrinsically
benign, as a means of promoting good and not just of avoiding harm. This can
be seen in the writings of Aristotle, whose philosophy had a profound effect on
medieval theologians such as Thomas Aquinas (see p. 181). In 'The Treatise of
Law', part of Summa Theologiae (1963), begun in 1265, Aquinas portrayed the
state as the 'perfect community' and argued that the proper effect of law was to
make its subjects good. He was clear, for instance, that government and law
would be necessary for human beings even in the absence of original sin. This
benign view of government as an instrument which enables people to cooperate
for mutual benefit has been kept alive in modern politics by the social-democratic
tradition (see p. 276).
LIBERALISM
Such systems of government are 'liberal' in the sense that they respect the
principle of limited government; individual rights and liberties enjoy some
form of protection from government. Limited government is typically upheld
in three ways. In the first place, liberal-democratic government is constitutional.
A constitution defines the duties, responsibilities and functions of the
various institutions of government and establishes the relationship between
government and the individual. Second, government is limited by the fact that
power is fragmented and dispersed throughout a number of institutions, creating
internal tensions or 'checks and balances'. Third, government is limited by
the existence of a vigorous and independent civil society, consisting of
autonomous groups such as businesses, trade unions, pressure groups and so
forth. Liberal democracies are 'democratic' in the sense that government rests
on the consent of the governed. This implies a form of representative democracy
in which the right to exercise government power is gained by success in
regular and competitive elections. Typically, such systems possess universal
adult suffrage and secret-ballot elections, and respect a range of democratic
rights such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of
movement. The cornerstone of liberal-democratic government is political
pluralism, the existence of a variety of political creeds, ideologies or philosophies
and of open competition for power amongst a number of parties. The
democratic credentials of such a system are examined in greater depth in
Chapter 6.
As the word's origins suggest - the Greek demokratia, meaning rule (kratos) by the people (demos) - the
core principle of democracy is self-rule (Hague and Harro, 2013).
Direct democracy was developed in ancient Athens and provided participatory models for citizens to
debate and contribute to their own governance through a large citizen assembly (with the caveat that
citizens excluded women, slaves and foreigners!). Hague and Harro (2013, p43) assert:
"In a direct democracy, the citizens themselves are the primary agent for reaching collective
decisions. Direct popular involvement – and in particular, the open deliberation that goes with it – is
judged to be educative in character, yielding confident, informed and committed citizens who are
sensitive both to public good and to the range of interests and opinions found even in small
communities.“
Logistically complex and more suited for small communities, forms of direct democracy have generally made
way for indirect forms of democracy – most commonly representative democracy where self-government
has become elected government. Contemporary forms of this system are far removed from the "intense,
collective discussions in the Athenian assembly" (Hague and Harro, 2013, p43) and are now a way to
popularly decide every few years which party or coalition of parties will make decisions on behalf of the
populous. Table 2 defines these forms.
When discussing comparative politics it is important to not fall into the easy assumption that democracy (and liberal democracy) is self-evidently the best form of rule. There are some obvious advantages of democracy over dictatorship and democracy may bring stability to previously divided societies where groups are able to share power (Hague and Harro, 2013).
But it is also not clear that democratically elected politicians engaging in policy-making is better than decision-making by experts. It can be argued that expert control provides stability and long term predictability in contrast to the short-term and electoral cycle driven decision-making by politicians regularly going to the polls.
Conversation starter – consider perspectives for and against. Possible questions to pose:
What does it mean to be a member of society?
What happens when some people are excluded from decision-making?
What is the relationship between ‘control of our circumstances’ (module 1) and participating in decision making that governs our lives?
Is there a role for health practitioners in building community political literacy?
However, democracy is not just a form of government, it is also an ideal. Opportunities for citizens to engage in the political process and gain power over the conditions in which they live, work and play is obviously compatible with the values of justice and empowerment that are central to health promotion.
Political participation is the individual and collective activities that are undertaken specifically to influence who governs and/or the decisions that they take (Hague and Harro, 2013). Political participation that works within the formal political processes such as elections and the legislature are termed conventional, while working outside of this system or possibly against it (and the status quo) is termed unconventional. The latter will be the focus of Module 12. The reading by Laverack (2013) introduces some foundation concepts for the role of citizens engaging in political action.
There are different perspectives on the value of political participation. An Aristotelian perspective (from ancient Greece) sees involvement in political decision-making by citizens as not only an obligation to community but an opportunity for personal development (Hague and Harro, 2013). This view sees political participation as a duty of citizenship – a responsibility as well as a right. To do otherwise would be ‘free-riding’ on the efforts of others.
An alternative view asserts that people are not inherently political and that engaging in political activities such as demonstrations and protests is a sign of trouble. The reverse (limited participation) is actually a sign that the system is meeting the needs of its citizens freeing them to pursue other activities; a sign of political satisfaction rather than political cynicism (Hague and Harro, 2013).
Studies looking at political participation have found a striking lack of direct participation beyond voting. Most people are what Milbrath and Goel (1977) termed political spectators (monitor politics to a greater or lesser degree but only participate directly through voting). The rest are either apathetics (who have no interest in formal politics) or gladiators (who directly engage in political campaigning); the latter outnumbered by the former (see Figure 1).
What does it mean for the type of representation/distribution of major and minor parties/diversity of views/number of representatives for a region…
Proportional representation electoral systems are used in Australia to elect candidates to the Senate, the upper houses of NSW, Victoria, South Australia, and Western Australia, the Lower House
of Tasmania, the ACT Legislative Assembly and many Local Government Councils. Under this system, parties, groups and independent candidates are elected to the Parliament in proportion to the number of votes they receive. Find out more: <http://www.eca.gov.au/systems/ proportional/>
Preferential voting systems in Australian lower houses (House of Representatives and Assemblies) are majority systems where candidates must receive an absolute majority, more than 50% of the total formal votes cast, to be elected. If the absolute majority is not gained on the first count, then preferences are distributed until an absolute majority is obtained. The term "preferential voting" means voters can indicate an order of preferences for candidates on the ballot paper, i.e. who they want as their 1st choice, 2nd choice and so on. Find out more: <http://www.eca.gov.au/
systems/single/>
Those who attended parliament may have heard the tour guide explain how the upper house has more diverse views and is easier to get into for minor parties and independents due to needing to get a quota rather than over 50% like lower house.
