This week builds upon last week’s discussion of citizenship and whether everyone is included in so-called liberal democratic societies, such as those of Europe. Everyone (almost!) says they are a democrat but democracy has many different meanings: the popular, direct or participatory democracy of classical Athens, Rousseau, Marx and Lenin; the protective, representative and limited democracy of the Mills and many liberals; and ideas which see democracy as merely a means for revolving governing elites, ensuring efficient government or the means by which governing politicians are made accountable. There are many different ideas of democracy, some of which stress empowerment and others the minimising of, and protection against, power. What sorts of society do these different forms of democracy require for their success? Are some of these forms, or even democracy in general, only appropriate for some sorts of society – (e.g. is democracy specific to the west)? Are the types of democratic systems that we live in today really democracies? Some have argued that representative democracy, where a parliament is elected every number of years, is not as inclusive as a participatory democracy where there is an attempt to include the population in decision making. Still others argue that this is utopian and that it is impossible to run a country if everyone is involved. Moreover, elite theorists argue that this runs contrary to human nature! We will be contrasting representative, elitist and participatory democratic styles and relating these to theories about who governs. Is there a small elite that runs the country, or does everyone have an equal say in a truly pluralist manner?
How Change Happens lecture IV: The Role of ActivismOxfam GB
The document discusses different theories of citizenship including liberal, communitarian, and republican models and how they emphasize individual rights, duties to community, and civic participation respectively. It also examines how citizens' movements can achieve lasting change through a combination of civil society activism and alliances with reformers inside the state. Theories of change are explored through archetypes like active citizenship, elite-driven reforms, and cross-class cooperation leading to greater accountability.
This document discusses democratic theory and citizens' support for democracy despite losing confidence in democratic institutions. It begins by defining democracy and institutions, then discusses how citizens have become more critical of political elites as values have shifted to post-material issues. While citizens are less trusting of institutions like political parties, this critical view reflects greater political sophistication rather than discontent with democracy itself. The essay will examine whether citizens' paradoxical views reveal something fundamental about the nature of democracy.
The document outlines the key aspects of Democratic Peace Theory (DPT), which posits that democratic nations are less likely to go to war with one another. It discusses the origins of DPT in Kant's writings, definitions of democracy, differences between western and non-western democracies, explanations for why democracies don't fight each other, analyses and criticisms of DPT, and provides an example case study related to DPT involving cooperation between EU countries.
The document discusses a new book called "Eden in Turmoil" about Kenya's transition from an election-centered democracy to one anchored in institutional and cultural reforms, arguing that future elections and governance will be determined by whether society internalizes reforms to confront elite capture that has perpetuated socio-political unrest since Kenya's 2007 post-election violence. It provides an overview of the book's concept and contents, which analyzes insights into modern democratic systems and how precedents, emotions, media freedom, and "counter-democracy" influence political and social dynamics.
This document contains the instructions and topics for discussion in a political science course on political violence. It lists terms and concepts related to political violence that students should think about and categories they should use to group their thoughts. It then outlines various types of political violence like revolutions, insurgencies, terrorism and non-violent resistance that will be covered in the class. Students are prompted with discussion questions under each topic.
Pluralism is a political and sociological theory that recognizes the various types of organizations within a state, such as religious, political, and social groups. It originated in the late 19th century through the work of German jurist Otto Von Gierke and was further developed by English legal historian F.W. Maitland. Pluralism asserts that groups in society arise independently and acquire authority not granted by the state. It also maintains that the state is just one of many groups that people use to satisfy their needs and that power should be decentralized away from the state.
Walter Lippman argued that it is impossible for citizens in a democracy to be fully informed on all issues, as idealized. Public opinion is influenced by cognitive shortcuts and predispositions. People rely on elites, interest groups, friends, and family to inform their opinions. There are two models of how public opinion forms - the elite model where elites generate messages that citizens absorb, and the activated masses model where citizens discuss issues and counter-elites drive grassroots movements. Public opinion has characteristics like direction, intensity, saliency, and latency. While there is often widespread agreement, there are also fundamental disagreements in public opinion around specific issues and core values.
This document summarizes different feminist theories of international relations, including liberal feminism, feminist constructivism, critical feminism, feminist poststructuralism, and postcolonial feminism. It discusses the key scholars and ideas within each approach. It also provides an example case study on feminist perspectives of sanctions against Iraq from 1990-2013, analyzing how questions around gender, power structures, and experiences are approached differently than mainstream theories. The document advocates using gendered lenses to re-examine other mainstream international relations case studies as well.
How Change Happens lecture IV: The Role of ActivismOxfam GB
The document discusses different theories of citizenship including liberal, communitarian, and republican models and how they emphasize individual rights, duties to community, and civic participation respectively. It also examines how citizens' movements can achieve lasting change through a combination of civil society activism and alliances with reformers inside the state. Theories of change are explored through archetypes like active citizenship, elite-driven reforms, and cross-class cooperation leading to greater accountability.
This document discusses democratic theory and citizens' support for democracy despite losing confidence in democratic institutions. It begins by defining democracy and institutions, then discusses how citizens have become more critical of political elites as values have shifted to post-material issues. While citizens are less trusting of institutions like political parties, this critical view reflects greater political sophistication rather than discontent with democracy itself. The essay will examine whether citizens' paradoxical views reveal something fundamental about the nature of democracy.
The document outlines the key aspects of Democratic Peace Theory (DPT), which posits that democratic nations are less likely to go to war with one another. It discusses the origins of DPT in Kant's writings, definitions of democracy, differences between western and non-western democracies, explanations for why democracies don't fight each other, analyses and criticisms of DPT, and provides an example case study related to DPT involving cooperation between EU countries.
The document discusses a new book called "Eden in Turmoil" about Kenya's transition from an election-centered democracy to one anchored in institutional and cultural reforms, arguing that future elections and governance will be determined by whether society internalizes reforms to confront elite capture that has perpetuated socio-political unrest since Kenya's 2007 post-election violence. It provides an overview of the book's concept and contents, which analyzes insights into modern democratic systems and how precedents, emotions, media freedom, and "counter-democracy" influence political and social dynamics.
This document contains the instructions and topics for discussion in a political science course on political violence. It lists terms and concepts related to political violence that students should think about and categories they should use to group their thoughts. It then outlines various types of political violence like revolutions, insurgencies, terrorism and non-violent resistance that will be covered in the class. Students are prompted with discussion questions under each topic.
Pluralism is a political and sociological theory that recognizes the various types of organizations within a state, such as religious, political, and social groups. It originated in the late 19th century through the work of German jurist Otto Von Gierke and was further developed by English legal historian F.W. Maitland. Pluralism asserts that groups in society arise independently and acquire authority not granted by the state. It also maintains that the state is just one of many groups that people use to satisfy their needs and that power should be decentralized away from the state.
Walter Lippman argued that it is impossible for citizens in a democracy to be fully informed on all issues, as idealized. Public opinion is influenced by cognitive shortcuts and predispositions. People rely on elites, interest groups, friends, and family to inform their opinions. There are two models of how public opinion forms - the elite model where elites generate messages that citizens absorb, and the activated masses model where citizens discuss issues and counter-elites drive grassroots movements. Public opinion has characteristics like direction, intensity, saliency, and latency. While there is often widespread agreement, there are also fundamental disagreements in public opinion around specific issues and core values.
This document summarizes different feminist theories of international relations, including liberal feminism, feminist constructivism, critical feminism, feminist poststructuralism, and postcolonial feminism. It discusses the key scholars and ideas within each approach. It also provides an example case study on feminist perspectives of sanctions against Iraq from 1990-2013, analyzing how questions around gender, power structures, and experiences are approached differently than mainstream theories. The document advocates using gendered lenses to re-examine other mainstream international relations case studies as well.
This document provides hints, tips, and sample questions for an exam on media representation. It discusses key topics like how representation has changed over time, and how human identity is increasingly mediated. It emphasizes using theories like Marxism and references to theorists like Gauntlett and Butler. Good answers discuss both media texts and the relationship between representation, institutions, audiences, and identity formation. Sample exam questions assess representation of youth, social groups, and how collective identity is constructed and mediated.
Political Science 2 – Comparative Politics - Power Point #5John Paul Tabakian
This document summarizes the key topics and readings for Dr. Tabakian's Political Science 2 course on modern world governments. The topics covered in the upcoming lectures include defining democracy, direct democracy, democratic transition, five generalizations about democracy, democratic peace theory, republican forms of government, and the similarities between democracy and capitalism. The reading assignments examine paradoxes of contemporary democracy and reflections on the end of history.
The document discusses civic virtue and American values such as republicanism, democracy, and constitutionalism that were influenced by political philosophers. It argues that civic virtue and patriotism are needed to engage citizens in public life and balance private and public interests. The document also addresses issues like extremism, distrust in government, and moral decay, and proposes remedies like good citizenship, civic religion, and national service to address infrastructure problems and strengthen American civic values and patriotism.
This document discusses several theories related to media influence and representation, including cultivation theory, cultural effects theory, pluralism, hegemony, and stereotypes. Cultivation theory proposes that television has small, gradual effects in reinforcing dominant societal ideologies. Cultural effects theory similarly argues that constant media exposure can subtly affect judgments over time. Pluralism posits that media merely reflect popular consensus values. Hegemony refers to the dominant classes using media to define societal norms. Stereotypes oversimplify groups using exaggerated or distorted characteristics.
Lecture five on politics as compromise and consensusDr. Afroz Alam
This lecture discusses politics as compromise and consensus. It defines politics as the activity of reconciling differing interests in society through compromise, conciliation, and negotiation rather than force. A political conflict involves public issues that demand a universal solution, not private matters resolved between individuals. While conflict is inevitable due to limited resources, competing claims cannot be crushed but must be reconciled. Politics is seen as an instrument of reconciliation that reflects liberal principles and the belief that disagreements can be resolved through debate rather than intimidation or violence, making it preferable to alternatives like brutality.
The sociological imagination chapter one the promise c.ariysn
This document summarizes chapter one of C. Wright Mills' book "The Sociological Imagination". It discusses how people often feel trapped by personal troubles within their private lives and environments, but these troubles are actually rooted in broader historical and social forces. It introduces the concept of the "sociological imagination", which allows one to understand how individual experiences are shaped by larger social contexts and shifts in society and history. The sociological imagination bridges the divide between personal troubles and public issues, and sees how they are interconnected. It enables people to understand both their own biographies and their society's structure and development.
The document discusses the importance of civic virtue and active citizenship in American democracy. It argues that civic virtue, which requires citizens to sacrifice some independence for the common good, is necessary for democratic and republican government structures to function effectively. The document also emphasizes balancing patriotism with liberal values to encourage civic participation. It suggests remedies like good citizenship, civic religion, national service, and improved civics education can help address issues like moral decay and political polarization that challenge American democracy.
The document discusses different perspectives on what politics is. It begins by describing the traditional view of politics as the art of government, referring to its origins in Ancient Greek city-states and definitions that see it as concerning the state and machinery of government. However, it also notes that politics occurs in all areas of social life, not just within government. The document goes on to discuss politics as involving public and authoritative decision-making that binds groups of people, though some decisions remain private. While a narrow view of politics limits it to government institutions, the reality is more complex.
This document discusses various theories related to media influence and representation, including cultivation theory, cultural effects theory, pluralism, and representation. It also covers concepts like ideology, hegemony, mediation, moral panics, stereotypes, implicit personality theory, social categorization, and countertypes. Several theorists are mentioned who contributed to understanding these concepts, such as Gerbner, Althusser, and Dyer.
Democracy and diversity CBSE class 10,12project Social ScienceVishvjeet Yadav
The document discusses democracy and social divisions. It defines democracy as a system of government where citizens participate in decision making through voting. It also discusses key elements of democracy like free and fair elections, citizen participation, protection of rights, and rule of law. The document then talks about how social divisions based on factors like language, religion, caste etc. can overlap with political divisions and potentially lead to conflict if exploited by political parties for political gains. However, it notes that this does not always result in disintegration of the country.
Politics involves making decisions that reconcile differing interests within a community. It arises when a group of people must choose a common policy but have mutually exclusive alternatives. While often viewed negatively, politics aims to achieve the common good by conciliating diverse interests through compromise and respect, as a particular civilizing way to address such political predicaments.
To see modernization and nationalism from the lens of vizonteleerdalerdogdu
The document provides an analysis of the Turkish film Vizontele from the perspectives of modernization, nationalism, imagined communities, discourses, and ideologies. It examines how the film portrays the introduction of television to a village in eastern Turkey in the 1970s and the conflicts and changes this brings. The arrival of television represents a step towards modernization but also causes disagreement as people are exposed to new ideas. The film depicts the negotiation between official culture promoted by the state-run television channel and local real culture. It explores themes of modernization and the different experiences of western and eastern Turkey in adopting modern concepts from Europe over the 20th century.
This document provides an overview of topics covered in a Political Science course on the US government, including theories of elitism and pluralism. It discusses key concepts of elitism such as society being divided between the powerful elite and weaker masses. The elite share common values and goals of preserving their power while allowing for some upward mobility. Pluralism is also summarized, noting society is divided into numerous groups competing to influence policy through bargaining and compromise. Theories of elitism and pluralism are compared. The document also covers related topics like propaganda, information flows, and spheres of influence.
This document provides an overview of the course topics and materials for a Political Science course. It includes definitions and theories that will be covered such as pluralism, elitism, rational choice theory, and power theory. Example videos and documents are also referenced to illustrate different concepts. The course will examine the influences on political behavior and how information flows from elites to the public. Students are welcomed to the class and introduced to the various methods that will be used to deliver course information.
The document discusses the concept of "racial neoliberalism" and how post-racialism has become the dominant way that racism is expressed discursively today. It also examines the debate around multiculturalism and how the "crisis of multiculturalism" has become a contemporary articulation of racism within this framework. Several quotes are presented analyzing these concepts from the perspective of the authors Lentin and Titley's book "The Crises of Multiculturalism."
The document discusses the concept of the "crisis of multiculturalism" which has been used to legitimize racism post-9/11. It argues that this crisis is actually a crisis of politics and the contemporary articulation of racism in a "postracial" age. The rhetoric around the crisis of multiculturalism is itself mired in culturalism, locating problems in the culture of the "other" and calling for more dominance of one's own culture. Both culturalization of politics and notions of culture are imbricated with concepts of race and used to discipline non-normative bodies.
This document provides hints, tips, and sample questions for an exam on media representation. It discusses key topics like how representation has changed over time, and how human identity is increasingly mediated. It emphasizes using theories like Marxism and references to theorists like Gauntlett and Butler. Good answers discuss both media texts and the relationship between representation, institutions, audiences, and identity formation. Sample exam questions assess representation of youth, social groups, and how collective identity is constructed and mediated.
Political Science 2 – Comparative Politics - Power Point #5John Paul Tabakian
This document summarizes the key topics and readings for Dr. Tabakian's Political Science 2 course on modern world governments. The topics covered in the upcoming lectures include defining democracy, direct democracy, democratic transition, five generalizations about democracy, democratic peace theory, republican forms of government, and the similarities between democracy and capitalism. The reading assignments examine paradoxes of contemporary democracy and reflections on the end of history.
The document discusses civic virtue and American values such as republicanism, democracy, and constitutionalism that were influenced by political philosophers. It argues that civic virtue and patriotism are needed to engage citizens in public life and balance private and public interests. The document also addresses issues like extremism, distrust in government, and moral decay, and proposes remedies like good citizenship, civic religion, and national service to address infrastructure problems and strengthen American civic values and patriotism.
This document discusses several theories related to media influence and representation, including cultivation theory, cultural effects theory, pluralism, hegemony, and stereotypes. Cultivation theory proposes that television has small, gradual effects in reinforcing dominant societal ideologies. Cultural effects theory similarly argues that constant media exposure can subtly affect judgments over time. Pluralism posits that media merely reflect popular consensus values. Hegemony refers to the dominant classes using media to define societal norms. Stereotypes oversimplify groups using exaggerated or distorted characteristics.
Lecture five on politics as compromise and consensusDr. Afroz Alam
This lecture discusses politics as compromise and consensus. It defines politics as the activity of reconciling differing interests in society through compromise, conciliation, and negotiation rather than force. A political conflict involves public issues that demand a universal solution, not private matters resolved between individuals. While conflict is inevitable due to limited resources, competing claims cannot be crushed but must be reconciled. Politics is seen as an instrument of reconciliation that reflects liberal principles and the belief that disagreements can be resolved through debate rather than intimidation or violence, making it preferable to alternatives like brutality.
The sociological imagination chapter one the promise c.ariysn
This document summarizes chapter one of C. Wright Mills' book "The Sociological Imagination". It discusses how people often feel trapped by personal troubles within their private lives and environments, but these troubles are actually rooted in broader historical and social forces. It introduces the concept of the "sociological imagination", which allows one to understand how individual experiences are shaped by larger social contexts and shifts in society and history. The sociological imagination bridges the divide between personal troubles and public issues, and sees how they are interconnected. It enables people to understand both their own biographies and their society's structure and development.
The document discusses the importance of civic virtue and active citizenship in American democracy. It argues that civic virtue, which requires citizens to sacrifice some independence for the common good, is necessary for democratic and republican government structures to function effectively. The document also emphasizes balancing patriotism with liberal values to encourage civic participation. It suggests remedies like good citizenship, civic religion, national service, and improved civics education can help address issues like moral decay and political polarization that challenge American democracy.
The document discusses different perspectives on what politics is. It begins by describing the traditional view of politics as the art of government, referring to its origins in Ancient Greek city-states and definitions that see it as concerning the state and machinery of government. However, it also notes that politics occurs in all areas of social life, not just within government. The document goes on to discuss politics as involving public and authoritative decision-making that binds groups of people, though some decisions remain private. While a narrow view of politics limits it to government institutions, the reality is more complex.
This document discusses various theories related to media influence and representation, including cultivation theory, cultural effects theory, pluralism, and representation. It also covers concepts like ideology, hegemony, mediation, moral panics, stereotypes, implicit personality theory, social categorization, and countertypes. Several theorists are mentioned who contributed to understanding these concepts, such as Gerbner, Althusser, and Dyer.
Democracy and diversity CBSE class 10,12project Social ScienceVishvjeet Yadav
The document discusses democracy and social divisions. It defines democracy as a system of government where citizens participate in decision making through voting. It also discusses key elements of democracy like free and fair elections, citizen participation, protection of rights, and rule of law. The document then talks about how social divisions based on factors like language, religion, caste etc. can overlap with political divisions and potentially lead to conflict if exploited by political parties for political gains. However, it notes that this does not always result in disintegration of the country.
Politics involves making decisions that reconcile differing interests within a community. It arises when a group of people must choose a common policy but have mutually exclusive alternatives. While often viewed negatively, politics aims to achieve the common good by conciliating diverse interests through compromise and respect, as a particular civilizing way to address such political predicaments.
To see modernization and nationalism from the lens of vizonteleerdalerdogdu
The document provides an analysis of the Turkish film Vizontele from the perspectives of modernization, nationalism, imagined communities, discourses, and ideologies. It examines how the film portrays the introduction of television to a village in eastern Turkey in the 1970s and the conflicts and changes this brings. The arrival of television represents a step towards modernization but also causes disagreement as people are exposed to new ideas. The film depicts the negotiation between official culture promoted by the state-run television channel and local real culture. It explores themes of modernization and the different experiences of western and eastern Turkey in adopting modern concepts from Europe over the 20th century.
This document provides an overview of topics covered in a Political Science course on the US government, including theories of elitism and pluralism. It discusses key concepts of elitism such as society being divided between the powerful elite and weaker masses. The elite share common values and goals of preserving their power while allowing for some upward mobility. Pluralism is also summarized, noting society is divided into numerous groups competing to influence policy through bargaining and compromise. Theories of elitism and pluralism are compared. The document also covers related topics like propaganda, information flows, and spheres of influence.
This document provides an overview of the course topics and materials for a Political Science course. It includes definitions and theories that will be covered such as pluralism, elitism, rational choice theory, and power theory. Example videos and documents are also referenced to illustrate different concepts. The course will examine the influences on political behavior and how information flows from elites to the public. Students are welcomed to the class and introduced to the various methods that will be used to deliver course information.
The document discusses the concept of "racial neoliberalism" and how post-racialism has become the dominant way that racism is expressed discursively today. It also examines the debate around multiculturalism and how the "crisis of multiculturalism" has become a contemporary articulation of racism within this framework. Several quotes are presented analyzing these concepts from the perspective of the authors Lentin and Titley's book "The Crises of Multiculturalism."
The document discusses the concept of the "crisis of multiculturalism" which has been used to legitimize racism post-9/11. It argues that this crisis is actually a crisis of politics and the contemporary articulation of racism in a "postracial" age. The rhetoric around the crisis of multiculturalism is itself mired in culturalism, locating problems in the culture of the "other" and calling for more dominance of one's own culture. Both culturalization of politics and notions of culture are imbricated with concepts of race and used to discipline non-normative bodies.
This document discusses asylum and the treatment of asylum seekers. It defines a refugee according to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention. Australia is legally obligated not to return refugees to countries where they may face persecution. However, in recent decades there has been a criminalization of asylum seekers in policies and media portrayals. The document also discusses the large numbers of displaced people globally, including over 60 million displaced due to conflicts. It notes that most refugees flee to neighboring countries rather than Western nations.
This document outlines a lecture on analyzing apologies, with a focus on Rudd's 2008 apology to the Stolen Generations.
The lecture will:
1) Analyze the cultural and political conditions that led to Rudd's apology in 2008, including key reports and events.
2) Examine how nations can be portrayed as subjects and objects of feeling in apologies.
3) Discuss how apologies allow us to bear witness to past harms and imagine a different future.
The lecture structure includes sections on the conditions for apology, nations and feelings, and apology as witnessing. It will analyze representations in media and politics and consider Indigenous perspectives on apologies and reconciliation.
Why the call for French 'context' in the aftermath of the attacks on Charlie Hebdo was steeped in a whiteness that denied the significance of a 'black analytics'.
This document discusses various perspectives on race and racism. It begins by asking questions about defining race and racism, and debunking common myths. Racism is defined as a system of domination based on racialization that constrains equality and considers human traits to be immutable. The document then discusses why studying race and racism is still important, as race is not a thing of the past. It examines theories that racism is natural or age-old and debunks these claims. The document explores Marxist and postcolonial perspectives on how racism intersects with politics, power, colonialism and the construction of identities. It concludes by discussing institutional racism and the social construction of racial identities.
As a special topic, this week will look at the fine line between racism and ‘humour’. British film and television has long been a site for views of the other. Originally, these were represented by white actors and comedians whose interpretations of ethnic minority life were often perceived as insulting and patronising. More recently, British filmmakers, actors and comedians have introduced a new genre to the British cultural sphere, one that takes a playful look at minority ethnic communities from their own perspective. It has been suggested that these representation are non-racist because they come from those potentially affected by racism themselves. In light of the recent furore surrounding the Borat film by Sascha Baron Cohen and other examples, this session asks what counts as humour and what is merely racist. We will be examining this question through the use of clips from different films and television shows as well as classic jokes. We will be relying mainly on clips of various films and TV shows to be shown in the lecture.
The concept of citizenship tends to be seen as inclusive. Today, more and more emphasis is placed on education for citizenship and is a major part of the curriculum. However, different theories of citizenship conceive it in different ways. Different tiers of citizenship are created according to the extent to which a person is said to belong. In some states, citizenship is conferred according to birth (jus soli) whereas in others it is a question of inheritance (jus sanguinus). However, even if someone is nominally a full citizen, they can be excluded in different ways, for example, due to their sex, ethnicity, or class status. This week we will examine the concept of citizenship and look at who is included, and who is excluded by it. We will pay particular attention to the ways in which class and socioeconomic deprivation have an effect on the ability to be a full citizen by examining the role of education, the Welfare State, and political participation.
The title of this week’s session is taken from the famous study of ‘mugging’ by Stuart Hall et al. in the 1970s in which the authors note the racialised nature of the crime of mugging and the instigation of a public ‘moral panic’ in the association of young black men and violent street crime. Taking this as a starting point, we shall look at the way in which racialised people have been seen as having a natural propensity to crime and deviance that justifies the use of ‘special measures’ against them. We shall pay particularly close attention to the cases of disproportionate incarceration, the ‘prison industrial complex’ and of the suspension of law in the case of the ‘Northern Territory Intervention’.
The Racial State Week 7: From theft to apologyAlana Lentin
The practice of removing Aboriginal children from their families led to an estimated 25,000 children becoming part of the ‘Stolen Generations’. Almost all Aboriginal Australians were directly affected by the Stolen Generations. The issue of the Stolen Generations is a prime example of two competing conceptualisations of race discussed by David Goldberg, in The Racial State, discussed in Week 3 – racial naturalism and racial historicism. Some have claimed that Aboriginal children were taken because it would lead to the destruction of Aboriginality, whereas others have claimed that children were taken benevolently, for their own good. Questions of responsibility, social justice and pain are at the heart of the debate around the Apology for the Stolen Generations enacted by Kevin Rudd in 2008. Does the Apology uncover or further mask the dispossession of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people? What version of Australian national identity does the Apology participate in in an era in which individual rights are prioritised over collective identities? How can a nation-state be ‘sorry’? Can nations have feelings? Through looking at representations of state policies and the discussion on ‘reconciliation’, this week will introduce ideas about emotion, recognition and belonging to the discussion on race and the state.
The talk examined the persistence of race in purportedly postracial times. Why do racial logics continue to underpin disparities in social, economic, cultural and political opportunities despite official commitments to the eradication of racism, not only within individual states but across them? Alana Lentin built on Barnor Hesse’s invocation of a ‘raceocracy’ which rules performatively and as a system for the management of human life. Zoning in on the global laboratory for the ‘production of horror’ that is the Australian system of mandatory detention for asylum seekers, she examined the co-dependency between the maintenance of the racialized border and professed commitments to a postracial future, a division which entrenches a divide between purified inside and the contaminants that lurk outside the contemporary racial state.
Good and bad diversity: The Crises of Multiculturalism as a Crisis of PoliticsAlana Lentin
The document discusses the concept of "crisis of multiculturalism" and how it relates to racism. It argues that claims of a multiculturalism crisis are disingenuously used to express racism. The debate is framed by a "post-racial logic" that ignores ongoing racial inequalities. It also criticizes how culture and diversity are sometimes selectively celebrated or condemned based on whose culture is being referred to. The document analyzes how multiculturalism and antiracism have been politicized and suppressed by elites over time.
This session will look at the politics of knowledge production and discuss the ways in which the establishment of the dominant discourses of legitimate knowledge relied upon the concomitant marginalisation of ‘other’ sources of knowledge. Mainstream approaches to the philosophy of social science have not, for the most part, been particularly concerned with the effects of epistemology on the racialized/ethnicized and/or the non-Western and non-white. This is because the West, as the location from which the majority of these viewpoints have been constructed, has either implemented a universalistic image of the world which proposes that it can be all encompassing, or because it has more directly ignored the world beyond Europe and the West. This session will critically discuss the emergence of ‘postcolonial studies’ and its positioning of the subaltern as the vantage point from which to critique these dominant discourses, as well as attending to the various problems present in such an undertaking, as identified in the writings of Spivak. It will also look at the problems of doing social research with or on ‘Other’ (non-white, non-Western) groups. We shall examine the problems of paternalism, tokenism, objectivism, victimisation and the intended or unintended abuses of power that can arise out of sensitive and highly politicised research situations. We also ask what a philosophy of social science would look like if it was purposefully dedicated to acknowledging the injustices borne of racism and colonialism and redressing them.
This week we will look at the attempts made to fight against racism. Anti-racism has been a feature of both social movements in civil society, and governmental bodies such as the British Commission for Racial Equality. As such, anti-racism cannot be said to be a unitary phenomenon. The diverse range of discourses, practices and policies under the heading of anti-racism means that we can only talk about it in the plural. Broadly speaking, anti-racism can be seen as divided between those discourses and practices that are more closely allied with a state-based vision, focused on the rule of law and institutionalized measures, and those that, on the contrary, see the state as a source – rather than a solution – to racism. What is the difference between these two approaches and how have they developed. In Britain, what are some of the ways in which anti-racism has taken form, e.g. in the trade union movement, through the intersection with music, from different political standpoints, as ‘anti-fascist’, or as anti-colonialist in inspiration? Looking at anti-racism from the 1960s to the present day, we shall tease out the many guises of anti-racism and ask if it is enough merely to be ‘against’ racism?
This lecture critically analyses postcolonial thinking, decolonial thought and critical border thinking.
Reading
Decolonizing the Social
Core Readings
Rámon Grosfoguel (2008) ‘Transmodernity, border thinking, and global coloniality: Decolonizing political economy and postcolonial studies’, Eurozine.
Chakrabarty, Dipesh (2000) Provincialising Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference Princeton University Press Introduction and Chapter One (pp. 3-47). [Library]
Verges, Francoise (2004) 'Postcolonial Challenges', in Nicholas Gane (ed.) The Future of Social Theory. Continuum.
Bhambra, Gurminder K. (2007) 'Multiple Modernities or Global Interconnections: Understanding the global post the colonial', in N. Karagiannis and P. Wagner (eds.), Varieties of World-Making: Beyond Globalization. Liverpool UP.
Hesse, Barnor. 2007. ‘Racialized Modernity: An analytics of white mythologies,’ Ethnic and Racial Studies, Volume 30, Issue 4: pages 643 - 663.
Mignolo, Walter D (2006) 'Citizenship, Knowledge, and the Limits of Humanity'. American Literary History (Cary, NC; Oxford) (18:2): 312-321.
Further Readings
Susan Buck-Morss, 'Hegel and Haiti,' Critical Inquiry 26(4): 821-865.
bell hooks (1990) 'Postmodern blackness', Postmodern Culture 1(1).
Fanon, Frantz (1963) ‘Concerning Violence’, Chapter 1 of The Wretched of the Earth. New York: Grove Press.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakrabarty (1988) ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’ in Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture University of Illinois Press, Chicago.
On Decolonial thought
Ann E. Reuman and Gloria E. Anzaldúa (2000) ‘Coming into Play: An Interview with Gloria Anzaldúa’, MELUS 25(2): 3-45.
Arturo Escobar (2010) ‘Latin America at a Crossroads’, Cultural Studies 24(1): 1 — 65.
Arturo Escobar (2007) ‘Worlds and Knowledges Otherwise', Cultural Studies 21(2): 179 —210.
Enrique Dussel (2009) ‘“Being-in-the-World-Hispanically”: A World on the “Border” of Many Worlds’, Comparative Literature 61(3): 256-273.
Walter D. Mignolo (2002) ‘The Zapatistas's Theoretical Revolution: Its Historical, Ethical, and Political Consequences’, Review 25(3): 245-275
Walter D. Mignolo (2011) ‘The communal and the decolonial’, Turbulence
For arguments bringing in the colonial relationship to general understandings see:
Appadurai, Arjun (1990) ‘Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy’ Public Culture Vol.2, No. 2, Spring pp1-23.
Said, Edward W. (1993) Culture and Imperialism Chatto and Windus, London.
Dirlik, Arif (1994) ‘The Postcolonial Aura: Third World Criticism in the Age of Global Capitalism’ Critical Inquiry Vol. 20, Winter pp. 328-35
Mohanty, Chandra Talpade (2002) ‘“Under Western Eyes” Revisited: Feminist solidarity through anticapitalist struggles’, Signs 28(2): 499-533.
Bar On, Bat-Ami (1993) ‘Marginality and Epistemic Privilege’
This document recaps the key themes from weeks 1-3 of a course on the racial state. Week 1 established that racism is modern, not natural or pathological. Week 2 explained that race functions like a language and racialization is a process involving naturalization and dehumanization. Week 3 discussed how modern states use race to rule and its connection to capitalism, viewing race as a system of management and control that constructs racial subjects through naturalism and historicism. The document concludes by having students write down one thing they learned and one thing they are still puzzled by.
This document discusses the relationship between civil society and ochlocracy. It argues that while civil society is seen as a shining example of democratic practice, it can easily turn into ochlocracy, which is direct rule by the mob or masses. Ochlocracy uses democratic illusions and demagogues to present itself as democracy, but is actually a form of tyranny. The document examines how unfinished transitions to democracy, failures of neoliberalism, and lack of alternative political ideas have allowed ochlocratic tendencies to subsume civil society in some countries. It concludes that democracy must recognize ochlocratic moments to prevent civil society from becoming a populist apparatus and maintain its democratic character.
This document discusses democratization and different perspectives on democracy. It examines Geddes' work on democratization after 20 years and definitions of democracy from scholars like Schumpeter focusing on competitive elections and broad participation. Trends are discussed like wealthier countries being more democratic and economic crises increasing breakdowns. The document also explores the variety of authoritarian regimes, limited multi-party systems as stepping stones to democracy, and why the regime type matters for democratization processes according to studies like Hadenius and Teorell from 2007.
Liberal Democracy by Muhammad Muinul IslamMuinul Polin
Liberal democracy combines majority rule with protections for individual rights. It is defined as a democracy where majoritarian decisions prevail in many policy areas, as long as they do not violate individuals' liberties and rights as outlined in a constitution. There are several major variants of liberal democracy that differ in their constitutional organization, election rules, party systems, and levels of citizen participation. Examples of liberal democracies include the USA, France, and Switzerland.
The document discusses different approaches to democratic institutions in divided societies, specifically comparing the views of Lijphart and Horowitz. Lijphart focuses on inclusion through consociational democracy, while Horowitz advocates for moderation through incentives-based approaches. The author argues that both inclusion and moderation are needed to address the fundamental issue of representation. Pure deliberative democracy may not be practical or inclusive enough in deeply divided post-conflict societies.
Paper Writing Service - HelpWriting.net 👈
✅ Quality
You get an original and high-quality paper based on extensive research. The completed work will be correctly formatted, referenced and tailored to your level of study.
✅ Confidentiality
We value your privacy. We do not disclose your personal information to any third party without your consent. Your payment data is also safely handled as you process the payment through a secured and verified payment processor.
✅ Originality
Every single order we deliver is written from scratch according to your instructions. We have zero tolerance for plagiarism, so all completed papers are unique and checked for plagiarism using a leading plagiarism detector.
✅ On-time delivery
We strive to deliver quality custom written papers before the deadline. That's why you don't have to worry about missing the deadline for submitting your assignment.
✅ Free revisions
You can ask to revise your paper as many times as you need until you're completely satisfied with the result. Provide notes about what needs to be changed, and we'll change it right away.
✅ 24/7 Support
From answering simple questions to solving any possible issues, we're always here to help you in chat and on the phone. We've got you covered at any time, day or night.
Democracy And Its Effect On Democracy
Democracy in its most basic form is a type of governing system ruled by the citizens of a particular society. The first form of democracy can be found in ancient Greece, and the modern form of Democracy was established in part by the French revolution because it brought back the idea of rule by the people. Although, for most of history democracy was not viewed in a positive light. According to Mintz, Close, and Croci many people feared democracy because they thought the masses would not act with reason and would try to take away power from the elite classes (2015). It was not until relatively recently in history that democracy became the leading form of governing around the world. This essay will focus on the different manifestations of democracy and how they function. The core of democracy is that the people in a society should have a say in governing and decision making; however in order to be considered a democracy a country must follow other democratic principles. This essay will argue that in many cases practical application of democracy does not always allow the people to have their view adequately translated into government and policy, due to the limitations of their political system. The only real power people have is electing a select few to their positions in government, or voting on decisions and policy decided by those officials. This does not allow for everyone and their views represented in government. This essay will also argue that some democratic systems
Get more content on HelpWriting.net
Democracy is a system of governance where people rule through elected representatives. There are different types of democracies like presidential and parliamentary systems. Not all democracies provide the same levels of civil liberties and rule of law. There are degrees of democracy, with some countries having more authoritarian practices. Other regime types include authoritarian, totalitarian, and sultanic governments. Multiple factors can support or hinder democracy such as a country's political culture, history, and economic development. Transitions to democracy involve a process of liberalization and consolidation over time.
The document discusses the concepts of democracy and democratic processes and practices. It defines democracy as a system of government where power belongs to the people. It outlines the historical development of democracy from ancient Greece and the types of democracy, including direct/pure democracy and indirect/representative democracy. It also discusses the principles/features of democracy, types of representative democracy, local government in Tanzania and the role of government in democratic processes.
This document discusses challenges with democracy and citizen participation. It makes the following key points:
1. Current democratic systems are not truly democratic, as they are manipulated by political and economic powers and do not incorporate meaningful citizen participation.
2. Top-down, controlled forms of participation that are initiated by governments do not work and are incompatible with emancipatory, bottom-up participation.
3. For participation tools and systems to be successful, they must be based on an understanding of political realities and designed in a wise, collaborative, and people-centered manner.
4. The document proposes the CitYsens project, which aims to develop collective intelligence in cities by facilitating citizen participation, civic organization involvement,
This document discusses political participation and trends in democracies. It notes that while voting is crucial, there are also unconventional forms of participation like protests. Recent trends show declines in voting and trust in political institutions. However, this civic malaise may not signify that democracies are in crisis. Democracies are adapting to changing interests and ways citizens get informed and participate, through new forms like interest groups and media. Overall, democracies may be revitalizing rather than declining.
Democratization in AfricaWhy do some efforts to democratize fa.docxsimonithomas47935
This document discusses challenges with democratization in Africa. It provides background on different types of democracies and examines why some attempts at establishing democracy have failed in countries like Sudan, South Sudan, Chad, Liberia and Ethiopia. These countries face issues like corruption, poverty, human rights abuses, and authoritarian rule under dictators which undermine democratic reforms. The document also analyzes factors that can contribute to successful democracies, such as respect for the rule of law, human rights, and the will of the people.
- Political thinkers have historically distinguished between competent political elites and the incompetent masses, though this distinction is controversial in democracies.
- Democratic and totalitarian regimes differ in how the ruling elite maintains power and allegiance - democratic elites use persuasion and allow themselves to be voted out, while totalitarian regimes use force and intend to rule for life.
- Contemporary liberal democracies are often described as "rule by competing elites" where elites gain power through elections and are replaced when incompetent, though who exactly comprises the political elite remains contentious.
This document provides an overview of democracy as a form of government. It defines democracy as a system where government is formed by the people through elected representatives. It discusses the principles of democracy such as free elections, rule of law, and majority rule. It then outlines some of the key reasons why democracy can lead to country development, including decentralized power, rise of political and economic institutions, and spread of education. The document also discusses some criticisms of democracy and lists both the merits and demerits of the democratic system of government. Finally, it provides some examples of countries that follow democratic principles.
Democracy means rule by the people. There are two main types of democracy - direct democracy where citizens directly make decisions, and representative democracy where citizens elect representatives to make decisions on their behalf. The UK practices representative democracy. While elections are free and fair, some argue the UK faces a democratic deficit, with declining voter turnout and a lack of choice between similar major parties. Reforms like increasing referendums and compulsory voting have been proposed to enhance UK democracy.
This document discusses different models of democracy and the current state of democracy globally. It defines the basic elements of democracy as consent of the governed through free elections and protection of individual rights. It outlines three main models of democracy - majoritarian, elite, and liberal - that prioritize either mass participation, general welfare, or individual rights, respectively. Data from Freedom House shows the number of electoral democracies has grown but not all respect civil liberties and political freedoms. Regional trends vary, with improvements in post-Communist states but declines in some other areas.
The document discusses several ways in which democracy and media can fail, including the manufacture of consent, the absence of genuine political choices, and pseudo events created by media for news coverage. It argues that true objectivity is impossible for media and their political reporting is inherently subjective. Media plays a large role in modern democracies but faces challenges in balancing democratic ideals with commercial interests as an influential institution. Overall, the passage examines several potential downfalls of both democracy and media that can undermine public participation in decision making.
Democracy is a complex term that generally refers to a system of government where the will of the majority prevails. It originated from ancient Greek words meaning "rule of the people." There are different forms and definitions of democracy, including direct democracy practiced in ancient Athens and modern Switzerland, and indirect or representative democracy that has evolved in Western Europe. Key aspects of a democratic system include principles of sovereignty of the people, social justice and equality, and protection of fundamental rights. A dictatorship is a rigid form of government where one person owns all state powers and citizens have few liberties, in contrast to democracy where people are the ultimate rulers.
The document defines democracy and provides definitions from various prominent figures. It discusses key principles of democracy such as popular sovereignty, political equality, and majority rule. It also outlines several features of Indian democracy like its federal system and collective ministerial responsibility. Both benefits and criticisms of democracy are presented. Benefits include stability, political education of citizens, and reduced chance of revolt due to representation. Criticisms include that it emphasizes quantity over quality, can lead to rule by the incompetent, is based on an unnatural concept of equality, and may ignore minority views.
Mass media and democratic consolidation in africa problems, challenges and pr...Alexander Decker
This document discusses the role of mass media in democratic consolidation in Africa. It notes that democracy requires free expression between governments and citizens. However, many African nations have experienced authoritarian rule that curtails media freedom and public participation. The document examines challenges facing media in promoting democracy, including restrictive laws and political interference. It argues that entrenching popular sovereignty and citizens' meaningful involvement in governance is key to sustaining democracy in Africa. The media can facilitate this by informing public debate, monitoring government, and advocating for democratic values, though its effectiveness depends on ensuring independence from state control.
Governance and Public Policy: Different Types of DemocracyRomal Sinaga
This document outlines a presentation on different types of democracy and their implications for accountable decision making and good governance. It discusses representative democracy, communitarianism, direct democracy, and deliberative democracy. It notes strengths and weaknesses of each approach. The document concludes that deliberative democracy best supports participation, discussion, and accountability while considering both present and future social, economic, and environmental interests. Good governance requires linking citizen demands to policy in a democratic manner.
Strategies for Effective Upskilling is a presentation by Chinwendu Peace in a Your Skill Boost Masterclass organisation by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan on 08th and 09th June 2024 from 1 PM to 3 PM on each day.
How to Make a Field Mandatory in Odoo 17Celine George
In Odoo, making a field required can be done through both Python code and XML views. When you set the required attribute to True in Python code, it makes the field required across all views where it's used. Conversely, when you set the required attribute in XML views, it makes the field required only in the context of that particular view.
Leveraging Generative AI to Drive Nonprofit InnovationTechSoup
In this webinar, participants learned how to utilize Generative AI to streamline operations and elevate member engagement. Amazon Web Service experts provided a customer specific use cases and dived into low/no-code tools that are quick and easy to deploy through Amazon Web Service (AWS.)
ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, and GDPR: Best Practices for Implementation and...PECB
Denis is a dynamic and results-driven Chief Information Officer (CIO) with a distinguished career spanning information systems analysis and technical project management. With a proven track record of spearheading the design and delivery of cutting-edge Information Management solutions, he has consistently elevated business operations, streamlined reporting functions, and maximized process efficiency.
Certified as an ISO/IEC 27001: Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) Lead Implementer, Data Protection Officer, and Cyber Risks Analyst, Denis brings a heightened focus on data security, privacy, and cyber resilience to every endeavor.
His expertise extends across a diverse spectrum of reporting, database, and web development applications, underpinned by an exceptional grasp of data storage and virtualization technologies. His proficiency in application testing, database administration, and data cleansing ensures seamless execution of complex projects.
What sets Denis apart is his comprehensive understanding of Business and Systems Analysis technologies, honed through involvement in all phases of the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC). From meticulous requirements gathering to precise analysis, innovative design, rigorous development, thorough testing, and successful implementation, he has consistently delivered exceptional results.
Throughout his career, he has taken on multifaceted roles, from leading technical project management teams to owning solutions that drive operational excellence. His conscientious and proactive approach is unwavering, whether he is working independently or collaboratively within a team. His ability to connect with colleagues on a personal level underscores his commitment to fostering a harmonious and productive workplace environment.
Date: May 29, 2024
Tags: Information Security, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, Artificial Intelligence, GDPR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find out more about ISO training and certification services
Training: ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management System - EN | PECB
ISO/IEC 42001 Artificial Intelligence Management System - EN | PECB
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - Training Courses - EN | PECB
Webinars: https://pecb.com/webinars
Article: https://pecb.com/article
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about PECB:
Website: https://pecb.com/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/pecb/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PECBInternational/
Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/PECBCERTIFICATION
How to Fix the Import Error in the Odoo 17Celine George
An import error occurs when a program fails to import a module or library, disrupting its execution. In languages like Python, this issue arises when the specified module cannot be found or accessed, hindering the program's functionality. Resolving import errors is crucial for maintaining smooth software operation and uninterrupted development processes.
Walmart Business+ and Spark Good for Nonprofits.pdfTechSoup
"Learn about all the ways Walmart supports nonprofit organizations.
You will hear from Liz Willett, the Head of Nonprofits, and hear about what Walmart is doing to help nonprofits, including Walmart Business and Spark Good. Walmart Business+ is a new offer for nonprofits that offers discounts and also streamlines nonprofits order and expense tracking, saving time and money.
The webinar may also give some examples on how nonprofits can best leverage Walmart Business+.
The event will cover the following::
Walmart Business + (https://business.walmart.com/plus) is a new shopping experience for nonprofits, schools, and local business customers that connects an exclusive online shopping experience to stores. Benefits include free delivery and shipping, a 'Spend Analytics” feature, special discounts, deals and tax-exempt shopping.
Special TechSoup offer for a free 180 days membership, and up to $150 in discounts on eligible orders.
Spark Good (walmart.com/sparkgood) is a charitable platform that enables nonprofits to receive donations directly from customers and associates.
Answers about how you can do more with Walmart!"
Main Java[All of the Base Concepts}.docxadhitya5119
This is part 1 of my Java Learning Journey. This Contains Custom methods, classes, constructors, packages, multithreading , try- catch block, finally block and more.
2. Overview
Are liberal democracies democratic?
Theories of democracy
A democratic deficit?
Can democracy be globalized?
Deep democracy: dream or reality?
9. A Democratic Deficit?
‘effective operation of a democratic political system usually
requires some measure of apathy and non-involvement on the part of
some individuals and groups.’
Samuel Huntington (1975)
10. A Democratic Deficit?
Bowling Alone?
‘effective operation of a democratic political system usually
requires some measure of apathy and non-involvement on the part of
some individuals and groups.’
Samuel Huntington (1975)
11. A Democratic Deficit?
Bowling Alone?
Apathetic for a
reason
‘effective operation of a democratic political system usually
requires some measure of apathy and non-involvement on the part of
some individuals and groups.’
Samuel Huntington (1975)
14. Can democracy be
globalized?
A global
parliament?
Democracy as a
commodity to be
exported
15. Debate
Is it possible for democracy to
function at the level of the state?
Is real democracy local?
How can local democracy feed in to
the state?
Is global democracy a desirable aim?
Do people want democracy to be
brought to them?
Editor's Notes
\n
\n
Exercise and then show Taking Liberties extract.\n
Theories of democracy generally revolve about the elaboration of these three basic models of democracy (although as David Held notes in ‘Models of Democracy’, these can potentially be divided up into several more sub-categories).\n\nThe origins of the term democracy is the Greek ‘demokratia’ - from the roots Demos (people) and kratos (rule).\n\nThe basic principle upon which democracy is based is that the people, as opposed to a small artistocratic elite, rules. However, there is much discussion about (a) who the people are, (b) what ruling means and (c) how rule by the people can be achieved.\n\nMany scholars have noted that democratic rule within nation-states is made increasingly difficult as states become modernised, grow larger, govern a growing number of people, have to deal with highly technical and specialised knowledge, etc. \n\nAlso, as the definition of the ‘people’ becomes broader, due to migration, globalisation, etc., how people can be engaged in their own rule is also raised as a significant problem. As we saw last week, there are numerous constraints placed on people to participate equally in public life (due to inequalities of various kinds). Democratic participation is often confined to citizens, making it difficult for those who are not citizens to participate in political decision-making (especially voting).\n\nRepresentative democracy:\n\nIf representative democracy means participating politically through the election of a proxy - a representative (e.g. a member of parliament) who acts on your behalf, many people have noted the limitations of this system. \n\nThese limitations include:\n\n- a lack of connections between local people and their representative, especially as politics become more professionalised (a candidate may be ‘parachuted in’ to an area rather than being intimately connected to the locality).\n\n- the fact that politics today is often mediated - in the sense of relying heavily on the media. The extent to which a party can mobilise the media to be on its side can have a huge impact on how people vote. This can be seen in the role played by newspapers like The Sun declaring on behalf of either Labour or the Conservatives in British general elections. The success of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy is another example - Berlusconi owns almost all the media outlets in Italy (especially the TV).\n\n- the fact that elections have become hugely expensive operations and that enormous sums of money are necessary to run them (especially in the US). This means that not only will only those with access to these funds be able to run for office, but also the political agenda will arguably be set by those with the financial means to support political campaigns. So, to what extent does the representative then represent her electorate or her financial backers?\n\n- The fact that elections can often be subject to corruption. It is well-known that elections have often been corrupted in various ways (votes ‘lost’ or spoilt’, voters threatened with violence, voters bought off...). There are international missions in place to try to curb this (e.g. international observers mainly deployed in post-conflict zones). However, the case of the 2000 presidential election in the US was arguably a case of corruption (voters in Florida - mainly poor and black - were often not sent ballot papers, voting machines were said not to have functioned properly, voters were turned away from the polls, etc.). This led to the election of George W. Bush after a Supreme Court decision despite the fact that his opponent, Al Gore, had a pparently won the popular vote.\n\n- Other arguments against representative democracy include an examination of the voting system itself. Many argue that systems such as First Past the Post in the UK or the electoral college system in the US are unfair, because they ultimately do not result in ‘one person, one vote’. Calls for proportional representation or the recently rejected ‘alternative vote’ system are seen as ways of rectifying this. But other argue that this would only be tinkering with an intrinsically unfair system in which only some (mainly elite men) get to be candidates in the first place, thus effectively disempowering the majority of poor people who do not feel truly represented by their supposed representative.\n\nAlternatives:\n\nSome argue for a replacement of representative democracy with direct or participatory democracy. These are in fact two different things.\n\nDirect democracy is inspired by anarchism and, if taken to the extreme, would be based on people governing themselves, based on their localities, or on collectives organised in different ways (e.g. workers collectives) but on a small scale. \n\nThe argument is that large-scale rule does not work as it always leads to the domination of the many by the few, usually in their own interest.\n\nOthers argue that such ideals are unrealistic. They argue instead for a greater extension of democracy through encouraging greater citizens’ participation in decision making. Examples include referenda (very common in Switzerland) or e-democracy.\n\nHowever, critics argue that referenda can lead to the tyranny of the majority. A recent example in Switzerland was the anti-minarets campaign whereby a referendum saw the building of minarets on mosques being banned. The arguably greater democratic principle of freedom of religion was put into peril because local parties mobilised Islamophobia sentiment to argue that allowing minarets to be built would lead to Islam dominating in Switzerland.\n\nE-democracy is about making greater use of the internet to encourage citizens to participate. If used extensively, we could imagine citizens being asked to vote on certain decisions via the internet. The way it is used in the UK is through e-petitions. David Cameron promised that if an e-petition gains 100,000 votes, the issue would be discussed in parliament. \n\nHowever, in practice the issue also needs MPs support. For example, an e-petition with 124,000 votes recently was on tax on fuel. A recent debate in parliament led George Osbourne announcing in November that there would be no fuel tax increase [CHECK]. This is arguably because a number of MPs supported the idea and it was also seen by the government as a popular idea in an otherwise grim budgetary outlook.\n\nIn contrast, another recent e-petition concerned the extradition of Babar Ahmed, currently being held without charge on suspicion of terrorism in the UK at the request of the US who can ask for him to be extradited at any time. Although the e-petition raised more than 140,000 signatures it has not led to a Commons’ debate.\n\nCan we think of other methods of participatory democracy that might be more effective?\n\nElite democracy:\n\nWhen we looked at elite theories of power in Week 2, we already saw that elite theorists were concerned that, if taken to the letter of the law, democracy can lead to the tyranny of the majority. Others saw the masses as simply unable to understand the is and outs of government. For many elite theorists, leaving government up to the people was too risky. The people were seen as too stupid, incompetent, or intolerant to do the job!\n\nIn a sense, the system of government in liberal democracies is a compromise because people are given apparent choice through voting but technical decisions are left up to the representatives and, above all, the bureaucracy.\n\nRecent examples in Greece and Italy, however, show that elite democracy is not only theoretical. Both Greece and Italy have put technocratic governments in power in order - it is hoped - to ensure economic stability. The leaders have not been elected but have been put in place by the presidents without recourse to elections. While some may breathe a sigh of relief that Berlusconi is gone, for example, for others this is an example of a flouting of the very principles of representative democracy.\n\n\n
Theories of democracy generally revolve about the elaboration of these three basic models of democracy (although as David Held notes in ‘Models of Democracy’, these can potentially be divided up into several more sub-categories).\n\nThe origins of the term democracy is the Greek ‘demokratia’ - from the roots Demos (people) and kratos (rule).\n\nThe basic principle upon which democracy is based is that the people, as opposed to a small artistocratic elite, rules. However, there is much discussion about (a) who the people are, (b) what ruling means and (c) how rule by the people can be achieved.\n\nMany scholars have noted that democratic rule within nation-states is made increasingly difficult as states become modernised, grow larger, govern a growing number of people, have to deal with highly technical and specialised knowledge, etc. \n\nAlso, as the definition of the ‘people’ becomes broader, due to migration, globalisation, etc., how people can be engaged in their own rule is also raised as a significant problem. As we saw last week, there are numerous constraints placed on people to participate equally in public life (due to inequalities of various kinds). Democratic participation is often confined to citizens, making it difficult for those who are not citizens to participate in political decision-making (especially voting).\n\nRepresentative democracy:\n\nIf representative democracy means participating politically through the election of a proxy - a representative (e.g. a member of parliament) who acts on your behalf, many people have noted the limitations of this system. \n\nThese limitations include:\n\n- a lack of connections between local people and their representative, especially as politics become more professionalised (a candidate may be ‘parachuted in’ to an area rather than being intimately connected to the locality).\n\n- the fact that politics today is often mediated - in the sense of relying heavily on the media. The extent to which a party can mobilise the media to be on its side can have a huge impact on how people vote. This can be seen in the role played by newspapers like The Sun declaring on behalf of either Labour or the Conservatives in British general elections. The success of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy is another example - Berlusconi owns almost all the media outlets in Italy (especially the TV).\n\n- the fact that elections have become hugely expensive operations and that enormous sums of money are necessary to run them (especially in the US). This means that not only will only those with access to these funds be able to run for office, but also the political agenda will arguably be set by those with the financial means to support political campaigns. So, to what extent does the representative then represent her electorate or her financial backers?\n\n- The fact that elections can often be subject to corruption. It is well-known that elections have often been corrupted in various ways (votes ‘lost’ or spoilt’, voters threatened with violence, voters bought off...). There are international missions in place to try to curb this (e.g. international observers mainly deployed in post-conflict zones). However, the case of the 2000 presidential election in the US was arguably a case of corruption (voters in Florida - mainly poor and black - were often not sent ballot papers, voting machines were said not to have functioned properly, voters were turned away from the polls, etc.). This led to the election of George W. Bush after a Supreme Court decision despite the fact that his opponent, Al Gore, had a pparently won the popular vote.\n\n- Other arguments against representative democracy include an examination of the voting system itself. Many argue that systems such as First Past the Post in the UK or the electoral college system in the US are unfair, because they ultimately do not result in ‘one person, one vote’. Calls for proportional representation or the recently rejected ‘alternative vote’ system are seen as ways of rectifying this. But other argue that this would only be tinkering with an intrinsically unfair system in which only some (mainly elite men) get to be candidates in the first place, thus effectively disempowering the majority of poor people who do not feel truly represented by their supposed representative.\n\nAlternatives:\n\nSome argue for a replacement of representative democracy with direct or participatory democracy. These are in fact two different things.\n\nDirect democracy is inspired by anarchism and, if taken to the extreme, would be based on people governing themselves, based on their localities, or on collectives organised in different ways (e.g. workers collectives) but on a small scale. \n\nThe argument is that large-scale rule does not work as it always leads to the domination of the many by the few, usually in their own interest.\n\nOthers argue that such ideals are unrealistic. They argue instead for a greater extension of democracy through encouraging greater citizens’ participation in decision making. Examples include referenda (very common in Switzerland) or e-democracy.\n\nHowever, critics argue that referenda can lead to the tyranny of the majority. A recent example in Switzerland was the anti-minarets campaign whereby a referendum saw the building of minarets on mosques being banned. The arguably greater democratic principle of freedom of religion was put into peril because local parties mobilised Islamophobia sentiment to argue that allowing minarets to be built would lead to Islam dominating in Switzerland.\n\nE-democracy is about making greater use of the internet to encourage citizens to participate. If used extensively, we could imagine citizens being asked to vote on certain decisions via the internet. The way it is used in the UK is through e-petitions. David Cameron promised that if an e-petition gains 100,000 votes, the issue would be discussed in parliament. \n\nHowever, in practice the issue also needs MPs support. For example, an e-petition with 124,000 votes recently was on tax on fuel. A recent debate in parliament led George Osbourne announcing in November that there would be no fuel tax increase [CHECK]. This is arguably because a number of MPs supported the idea and it was also seen by the government as a popular idea in an otherwise grim budgetary outlook.\n\nIn contrast, another recent e-petition concerned the extradition of Babar Ahmed, currently being held without charge on suspicion of terrorism in the UK at the request of the US who can ask for him to be extradited at any time. Although the e-petition raised more than 140,000 signatures it has not led to a Commons’ debate.\n\nCan we think of other methods of participatory democracy that might be more effective?\n\nElite democracy:\n\nWhen we looked at elite theories of power in Week 2, we already saw that elite theorists were concerned that, if taken to the letter of the law, democracy can lead to the tyranny of the majority. Others saw the masses as simply unable to understand the is and outs of government. For many elite theorists, leaving government up to the people was too risky. The people were seen as too stupid, incompetent, or intolerant to do the job!\n\nIn a sense, the system of government in liberal democracies is a compromise because people are given apparent choice through voting but technical decisions are left up to the representatives and, above all, the bureaucracy.\n\nRecent examples in Greece and Italy, however, show that elite democracy is not only theoretical. Both Greece and Italy have put technocratic governments in power in order - it is hoped - to ensure economic stability. The leaders have not been elected but have been put in place by the presidents without recourse to elections. While some may breathe a sigh of relief that Berlusconi is gone, for example, for others this is an example of a flouting of the very principles of representative democracy.\n\n\n
Theories of democracy generally revolve about the elaboration of these three basic models of democracy (although as David Held notes in ‘Models of Democracy’, these can potentially be divided up into several more sub-categories).\n\nThe origins of the term democracy is the Greek ‘demokratia’ - from the roots Demos (people) and kratos (rule).\n\nThe basic principle upon which democracy is based is that the people, as opposed to a small artistocratic elite, rules. However, there is much discussion about (a) who the people are, (b) what ruling means and (c) how rule by the people can be achieved.\n\nMany scholars have noted that democratic rule within nation-states is made increasingly difficult as states become modernised, grow larger, govern a growing number of people, have to deal with highly technical and specialised knowledge, etc. \n\nAlso, as the definition of the ‘people’ becomes broader, due to migration, globalisation, etc., how people can be engaged in their own rule is also raised as a significant problem. As we saw last week, there are numerous constraints placed on people to participate equally in public life (due to inequalities of various kinds). Democratic participation is often confined to citizens, making it difficult for those who are not citizens to participate in political decision-making (especially voting).\n\nRepresentative democracy:\n\nIf representative democracy means participating politically through the election of a proxy - a representative (e.g. a member of parliament) who acts on your behalf, many people have noted the limitations of this system. \n\nThese limitations include:\n\n- a lack of connections between local people and their representative, especially as politics become more professionalised (a candidate may be ‘parachuted in’ to an area rather than being intimately connected to the locality).\n\n- the fact that politics today is often mediated - in the sense of relying heavily on the media. The extent to which a party can mobilise the media to be on its side can have a huge impact on how people vote. This can be seen in the role played by newspapers like The Sun declaring on behalf of either Labour or the Conservatives in British general elections. The success of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy is another example - Berlusconi owns almost all the media outlets in Italy (especially the TV).\n\n- the fact that elections have become hugely expensive operations and that enormous sums of money are necessary to run them (especially in the US). This means that not only will only those with access to these funds be able to run for office, but also the political agenda will arguably be set by those with the financial means to support political campaigns. So, to what extent does the representative then represent her electorate or her financial backers?\n\n- The fact that elections can often be subject to corruption. It is well-known that elections have often been corrupted in various ways (votes ‘lost’ or spoilt’, voters threatened with violence, voters bought off...). There are international missions in place to try to curb this (e.g. international observers mainly deployed in post-conflict zones). However, the case of the 2000 presidential election in the US was arguably a case of corruption (voters in Florida - mainly poor and black - were often not sent ballot papers, voting machines were said not to have functioned properly, voters were turned away from the polls, etc.). This led to the election of George W. Bush after a Supreme Court decision despite the fact that his opponent, Al Gore, had a pparently won the popular vote.\n\n- Other arguments against representative democracy include an examination of the voting system itself. Many argue that systems such as First Past the Post in the UK or the electoral college system in the US are unfair, because they ultimately do not result in ‘one person, one vote’. Calls for proportional representation or the recently rejected ‘alternative vote’ system are seen as ways of rectifying this. But other argue that this would only be tinkering with an intrinsically unfair system in which only some (mainly elite men) get to be candidates in the first place, thus effectively disempowering the majority of poor people who do not feel truly represented by their supposed representative.\n\nAlternatives:\n\nSome argue for a replacement of representative democracy with direct or participatory democracy. These are in fact two different things.\n\nDirect democracy is inspired by anarchism and, if taken to the extreme, would be based on people governing themselves, based on their localities, or on collectives organised in different ways (e.g. workers collectives) but on a small scale. \n\nThe argument is that large-scale rule does not work as it always leads to the domination of the many by the few, usually in their own interest.\n\nOthers argue that such ideals are unrealistic. They argue instead for a greater extension of democracy through encouraging greater citizens’ participation in decision making. Examples include referenda (very common in Switzerland) or e-democracy.\n\nHowever, critics argue that referenda can lead to the tyranny of the majority. A recent example in Switzerland was the anti-minarets campaign whereby a referendum saw the building of minarets on mosques being banned. The arguably greater democratic principle of freedom of religion was put into peril because local parties mobilised Islamophobia sentiment to argue that allowing minarets to be built would lead to Islam dominating in Switzerland.\n\nE-democracy is about making greater use of the internet to encourage citizens to participate. If used extensively, we could imagine citizens being asked to vote on certain decisions via the internet. The way it is used in the UK is through e-petitions. David Cameron promised that if an e-petition gains 100,000 votes, the issue would be discussed in parliament. \n\nHowever, in practice the issue also needs MPs support. For example, an e-petition with 124,000 votes recently was on tax on fuel. A recent debate in parliament led George Osbourne announcing in November that there would be no fuel tax increase [CHECK]. This is arguably because a number of MPs supported the idea and it was also seen by the government as a popular idea in an otherwise grim budgetary outlook.\n\nIn contrast, another recent e-petition concerned the extradition of Babar Ahmed, currently being held without charge on suspicion of terrorism in the UK at the request of the US who can ask for him to be extradited at any time. Although the e-petition raised more than 140,000 signatures it has not led to a Commons’ debate.\n\nCan we think of other methods of participatory democracy that might be more effective?\n\nElite democracy:\n\nWhen we looked at elite theories of power in Week 2, we already saw that elite theorists were concerned that, if taken to the letter of the law, democracy can lead to the tyranny of the majority. Others saw the masses as simply unable to understand the is and outs of government. For many elite theorists, leaving government up to the people was too risky. The people were seen as too stupid, incompetent, or intolerant to do the job!\n\nIn a sense, the system of government in liberal democracies is a compromise because people are given apparent choice through voting but technical decisions are left up to the representatives and, above all, the bureaucracy.\n\nRecent examples in Greece and Italy, however, show that elite democracy is not only theoretical. Both Greece and Italy have put technocratic governments in power in order - it is hoped - to ensure economic stability. The leaders have not been elected but have been put in place by the presidents without recourse to elections. While some may breathe a sigh of relief that Berlusconi is gone, for example, for others this is an example of a flouting of the very principles of representative democracy.\n\n\n
Many commentators have noted the increased disinterest of citizens of western liberal democracies in political participation, including going to vote.\n\nFor example, the 63% who turned out to vote in the last US elections was a record high. In 2001, only 59% of the UK electorate voted. In 2010, it was 65.1%.\n\nThis has been theorised differently by different people.\n\nBowling Alone\n\nRobert Putnam (2001) has noted a greater tendency towards individualism in societies such as the US and the UK and has said that this is behind the lack of citizens’ involvement in public life. He called this ‘bowling alone’ because, people were engaged in less and less common activities, even bowling. This is due to more and more time spent indoors due to the proliferation of TV and the internet, but also changes in demographics, such as the breakdown of the nuclear family, and geographical mobility meaning that people are more detached from the places they live.\n\nHowever, critics have pointed out that Putnam’s observation can be explained by looking at the effects of neoliberalism on society which has created more atomization. \n\nFor example, in The Return of the Public, Dan Hind looks at how, in the 1970s in the US, elites started to become concerned with ordinary people’s seeming lack of trust in the political system. In 1970, a study by the University of Michigan, for example, found that trust in government had fallen to very low levels. This was higher among blue collar workers, 61% of whom said they had low trust in the government, according to Howard Zinn. \n\nIn 1975, Samuel Huntington contributed to a book of essays entitled The Crisis of Democracy. In his essay, Huntington argued that the mistrust in government and rise in involvement in nongovernmental, oppositionary movements meant there was an ‘excess of democracy’. He worried that this would lead to the disappearance of social control and authority. \n\nHuntington has two solutions to this. The first was classic elitism - government shouldn’t necessarily be based on democracy. Rather it had to be run by experts\n\nSecondly, he advocated that the ‘effective operation of a democratic political system usually requires some measure of apathy and non-involvement on the part of some individuals and groups.’\n\nUnder neoliberalism, apathy was created by elevating the role of experts, giving the impression that government and the economy could only be run by highly specialised experts. At the same time, groups who challenged the state were beaten back into apathy and isolation as more and more people became convinced by the idea put forward by the business sector - which was increasingly closer to government - that the public sector was a drain on the economy and had to be fought.\n\nAs Dan Hind explains, public choice theory became the theory that explained how voting took place under neoliberalism. As people became individuals in unregulated markets - rather than members of a common civil society - voting would only choose the candidates who would give them the most material goods. But because voting could only be the expression of an individual’s own interest, no individual’s vote could be decisive at a national level where millions were involved. Therefore, there was no point in voting.\n\nAccording to Dan Hind, this orchestrated disengagement of the public from democracy paid the way for the dismantling of the public with private capital increasingly controlling the political agenda.\n\nApathetic for a reason\n\nIn his book, The Meaning of David Cameron, Richard Seymour explains further how apathy is orchestrated. While people seem to be acting against their own interests if they don’t vote, they also need to have something to vote for. Universal suffrage itself was only achieved because people fought for it; It was not something about which people had the option of voting. But, increasingly, people are noticing that when they try to fight for something there is no change. He gives the example of the 2003 anti-war march.\n\nSeymour argues that the real democratic deficit is to be found in the fact that most working class people in a society like Britain are not represented. They have no channels through which to be represented due to the erosion of trade unions for example. Therefore, if they do not vote it is not mere apathy (e.g. that they don’t care) but that they don’t see their interests as being given importance. \n\n\n
Many commentators have noted the increased disinterest of citizens of western liberal democracies in political participation, including going to vote.\n\nFor example, the 63% who turned out to vote in the last US elections was a record high. In 2001, only 59% of the UK electorate voted. In 2010, it was 65.1%.\n\nThis has been theorised differently by different people.\n\nBowling Alone\n\nRobert Putnam (2001) has noted a greater tendency towards individualism in societies such as the US and the UK and has said that this is behind the lack of citizens’ involvement in public life. He called this ‘bowling alone’ because, people were engaged in less and less common activities, even bowling. This is due to more and more time spent indoors due to the proliferation of TV and the internet, but also changes in demographics, such as the breakdown of the nuclear family, and geographical mobility meaning that people are more detached from the places they live.\n\nHowever, critics have pointed out that Putnam’s observation can be explained by looking at the effects of neoliberalism on society which has created more atomization. \n\nFor example, in The Return of the Public, Dan Hind looks at how, in the 1970s in the US, elites started to become concerned with ordinary people’s seeming lack of trust in the political system. In 1970, a study by the University of Michigan, for example, found that trust in government had fallen to very low levels. This was higher among blue collar workers, 61% of whom said they had low trust in the government, according to Howard Zinn. \n\nIn 1975, Samuel Huntington contributed to a book of essays entitled The Crisis of Democracy. In his essay, Huntington argued that the mistrust in government and rise in involvement in nongovernmental, oppositionary movements meant there was an ‘excess of democracy’. He worried that this would lead to the disappearance of social control and authority. \n\nHuntington has two solutions to this. The first was classic elitism - government shouldn’t necessarily be based on democracy. Rather it had to be run by experts\n\nSecondly, he advocated that the ‘effective operation of a democratic political system usually requires some measure of apathy and non-involvement on the part of some individuals and groups.’\n\nUnder neoliberalism, apathy was created by elevating the role of experts, giving the impression that government and the economy could only be run by highly specialised experts. At the same time, groups who challenged the state were beaten back into apathy and isolation as more and more people became convinced by the idea put forward by the business sector - which was increasingly closer to government - that the public sector was a drain on the economy and had to be fought.\n\nAs Dan Hind explains, public choice theory became the theory that explained how voting took place under neoliberalism. As people became individuals in unregulated markets - rather than members of a common civil society - voting would only choose the candidates who would give them the most material goods. But because voting could only be the expression of an individual’s own interest, no individual’s vote could be decisive at a national level where millions were involved. Therefore, there was no point in voting.\n\nAccording to Dan Hind, this orchestrated disengagement of the public from democracy paid the way for the dismantling of the public with private capital increasingly controlling the political agenda.\n\nApathetic for a reason\n\nIn his book, The Meaning of David Cameron, Richard Seymour explains further how apathy is orchestrated. While people seem to be acting against their own interests if they don’t vote, they also need to have something to vote for. Universal suffrage itself was only achieved because people fought for it; It was not something about which people had the option of voting. But, increasingly, people are noticing that when they try to fight for something there is no change. He gives the example of the 2003 anti-war march.\n\nSeymour argues that the real democratic deficit is to be found in the fact that most working class people in a society like Britain are not represented. They have no channels through which to be represented due to the erosion of trade unions for example. Therefore, if they do not vote it is not mere apathy (e.g. that they don’t care) but that they don’t see their interests as being given importance. \n\n\n
\nMost scholars point out the western origins of democracy going back to Greek and Roman traditions and developed out of struggles in Europe. Democracy is not seen as intrinsic to the non-western world according to some.\n\nOthers, in contrast, draw a strong link between democracy and human rights implying that democracy is a universal value that all people aspire to. This is grounded in the belief that it is the best possible system and what people naturally strive for. \n\nBoth of these views appear limited because, to argue that it is western is to forget the unevenness of the spread of democracy in the West itself. For example, despite the achievements of the French revolution in overthrowing the monarchy, the rise of Napoleon meant that the French spent many decades under another form of monarchy before really becoming citizens of a Republic. In all European countries, universal suffrage took a long time to come about. In Switzerland, for example, women only got the vote in 1971. \n\nEven if western countries were relatively democratic, until the 20th century those without property, women and the colonised could not vote. Societies that benefited from slavery until the 18th century (and thereafter indentured labour) could not be said to be truly democratic...\n\nThe contrary view, which sees democracy as a universal value also forgets that democracy as an idea develops under specific circumstances in specific locations. It is by no means an ideal system. Seymour and others point out that suffrage is extended in European countries ultimately because it is seen as the best way of containing revolution. \n\nThe growth in internationalism (communism) in the 19th and early 20th centuries meant that the ruling class had to do something to appease the workers who were increasingly seeing themselves as an international force capable of dismantling elite power. The Russian revolution proved this could happen. So, one of the ways of keeping revolution under control was to give the working class the impression that they were participating without ultimately significantly changing the way power was exercised.\n\nA global parliament\n\nThese reservations notwithstanding, those who support democracy see it as the only viable system of government internationally. Scholars such as Held propose that, undert globalization, there should be a democratization of global governance. International organisations such as the UN, the EU and the WTO etc. are insufficiently transparent and accountable. \n\nHeld believes there should be a global parliament which would make law and policy at an international level. He sees this being organised through transnational regional political institutions such as the EU. This would work by decisions being taken at local levels but all being ultimately accountable to a global parliament in a system Held calls cosmopolitan democracy. \n\nHowever, critics of Held say that this is highly unrealistic because democracy is difficult enough to ensure at the national level and that it is likely that the more international an institution, the more it will only represent politicl elites.\n\nThis is the type of criticism made of the European institutions that are seen as being unrepresentative and not transparent. The European parliament is widely seen as an institution with no political power. This was highlighted during the recent protest at the European University Institute when the European Council president Herman Von Rompuy came to give a speech. The protestors accused the EU of imposing antidemocratic decisions on the European people, such as the austerity measures being imposed on Greece, Italy and Ireland. \n\nExporting democracy\n\nOver the last decade, mounting criticisms have been heard against the West’s role in exporting democracy. Since the 1970s, the US in particular was involved in wars purportedly to bring democracy to communist run countries or countries with a strong socialist presence. In the context of the Cold War, this was part of an ideological war between opposed super powers.\n\nMore recently, the US and its allies have been involved in wars, occupations and other missions (e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya...) to bring about democracy and topple dictators responsible for human rights violations. However, critics have argued that democracy is not something that can be imposed. It has to be something fought for by people themselves (as was the case in the west). They also point out the disparity between contexts. For example, the toppling of Mubarak in Egypt last Spring was not initially met with support from western countries who viewed Mubarak as an ally. The contrast with the approach to Gaddafi is marked. Israel that speaks of itself as the ‘only democracy in the Middle east’ is not comfortable with Mubarak’s demise or the spread of democratic movements in the Middle East because these movements may be opposed to it.\n\nSimilarly, opponents of parties such as Hamas are often reminded that they were voted in in democratic elections. Democracy does not always bring about the preferred result. The Arab Spring is an example of how freedom, rather than democracy, appears to be the aim of protestors around the world. People may be less concerned with the right to vote than the right to equality and freedom from material hardship. Here there may be an overlap with the concerns of movements in the West, such as the Occupy movements, who seem more concerned with redressing unequal redistribution (from the rich to the poor) than with having the right to vote. Indeed having the right to vote doesn’t seem to change the material hardship and inequality faced by many people.\n\nIt may be necessary to ask whether formal, procedural democracy is a good aim to strive for. If not, what is the difference between freedom and democracy? Should we reassess what we mean by democracy, setting it apart from the mere right to vote. \n
\nMost scholars point out the western origins of democracy going back to Greek and Roman traditions and developed out of struggles in Europe. Democracy is not seen as intrinsic to the non-western world according to some.\n\nOthers, in contrast, draw a strong link between democracy and human rights implying that democracy is a universal value that all people aspire to. This is grounded in the belief that it is the best possible system and what people naturally strive for. \n\nBoth of these views appear limited because, to argue that it is western is to forget the unevenness of the spread of democracy in the West itself. For example, despite the achievements of the French revolution in overthrowing the monarchy, the rise of Napoleon meant that the French spent many decades under another form of monarchy before really becoming citizens of a Republic. In all European countries, universal suffrage took a long time to come about. In Switzerland, for example, women only got the vote in 1971. \n\nEven if western countries were relatively democratic, until the 20th century those without property, women and the colonised could not vote. Societies that benefited from slavery until the 18th century (and thereafter indentured labour) could not be said to be truly democratic...\n\nThe contrary view, which sees democracy as a universal value also forgets that democracy as an idea develops under specific circumstances in specific locations. It is by no means an ideal system. Seymour and others point out that suffrage is extended in European countries ultimately because it is seen as the best way of containing revolution. \n\nThe growth in internationalism (communism) in the 19th and early 20th centuries meant that the ruling class had to do something to appease the workers who were increasingly seeing themselves as an international force capable of dismantling elite power. The Russian revolution proved this could happen. So, one of the ways of keeping revolution under control was to give the working class the impression that they were participating without ultimately significantly changing the way power was exercised.\n\nA global parliament\n\nThese reservations notwithstanding, those who support democracy see it as the only viable system of government internationally. Scholars such as Held propose that, undert globalization, there should be a democratization of global governance. International organisations such as the UN, the EU and the WTO etc. are insufficiently transparent and accountable. \n\nHeld believes there should be a global parliament which would make law and policy at an international level. He sees this being organised through transnational regional political institutions such as the EU. This would work by decisions being taken at local levels but all being ultimately accountable to a global parliament in a system Held calls cosmopolitan democracy. \n\nHowever, critics of Held say that this is highly unrealistic because democracy is difficult enough to ensure at the national level and that it is likely that the more international an institution, the more it will only represent politicl elites.\n\nThis is the type of criticism made of the European institutions that are seen as being unrepresentative and not transparent. The European parliament is widely seen as an institution with no political power. This was highlighted during the recent protest at the European University Institute when the European Council president Herman Von Rompuy came to give a speech. The protestors accused the EU of imposing antidemocratic decisions on the European people, such as the austerity measures being imposed on Greece, Italy and Ireland. \n\nExporting democracy\n\nOver the last decade, mounting criticisms have been heard against the West’s role in exporting democracy. Since the 1970s, the US in particular was involved in wars purportedly to bring democracy to communist run countries or countries with a strong socialist presence. In the context of the Cold War, this was part of an ideological war between opposed super powers.\n\nMore recently, the US and its allies have been involved in wars, occupations and other missions (e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya...) to bring about democracy and topple dictators responsible for human rights violations. However, critics have argued that democracy is not something that can be imposed. It has to be something fought for by people themselves (as was the case in the west). They also point out the disparity between contexts. For example, the toppling of Mubarak in Egypt last Spring was not initially met with support from western countries who viewed Mubarak as an ally. The contrast with the approach to Gaddafi is marked. Israel that speaks of itself as the ‘only democracy in the Middle east’ is not comfortable with Mubarak’s demise or the spread of democratic movements in the Middle East because these movements may be opposed to it.\n\nSimilarly, opponents of parties such as Hamas are often reminded that they were voted in in democratic elections. Democracy does not always bring about the preferred result. The Arab Spring is an example of how freedom, rather than democracy, appears to be the aim of protestors around the world. People may be less concerned with the right to vote than the right to equality and freedom from material hardship. Here there may be an overlap with the concerns of movements in the West, such as the Occupy movements, who seem more concerned with redressing unequal redistribution (from the rich to the poor) than with having the right to vote. Indeed having the right to vote doesn’t seem to change the material hardship and inequality faced by many people.\n\nIt may be necessary to ask whether formal, procedural democracy is a good aim to strive for. If not, what is the difference between freedom and democracy? Should we reassess what we mean by democracy, setting it apart from the mere right to vote. \n