Direct Democracy

A philosophical point of view

11 April 2016

What is Democracy?

Democracy (Christiano, 2015)

”[. . . ] a method of group decision making characterized by akind of equality among the participants at an essential stage ofthe collective decision making.”

I Decisions made for groups that are binding on every member.

I Families, firms, states, transnational organizations, . . .

I Definition is not normative.

I Equality can be more or less deep.

How to evaluate Democracy?

I ConsequentiallyI Instrumental arguments pro Democracy:

I Good laws and policiesI Improvements in character of participants

I Instrumental arguments against Democracy:I Expertise to govern societies underminedI Apathetic and ill-informed citizens ⇒ special interests control

the behavior of politicians ⇒ state used for their own purposes

I IntrinsicallyI Liberty

I pro: Democracy extends to collective decision making the ideathat each ought to be master of his/her life

I EqualityI pro: Everyone has an equal say when trying to resolve

disagreements on matters of common concern

problem: How to deal with persistent disagreement andminorities? (⇒ consensus hardly achieved)

Problems of Democracy (and possible responses)

1. Some people are more “intelligent” or “moral” than others;

2. People devote time to politics 6⇔ People devote time to otherimportant tasks;

3. The impact of a single vote is small ⇒ Responsibility for theoutcome fades away.

I Elite Theory of Democracy

I Interest Group Pluralism

I Neo-Liberalism

Direct and Representative Democracy

Direct (Pure) Democracy

Form of democracy in which people decide policy initiativesdirectly.

Representative Democracy

Form of democracy in which elected officials (representing agroup of people) decide policy initiatives.

⇒ Not necessarily a clear-cut division (e.g. representativedemocracy with referenda).

In defense of Direct Democracy

Thesis (Barber, 1984)

Strong democracy is the only form of government that isgenuinely and completely democratic.

I ”Under a representative democracy the voter is free only theday he casts his ballot”.

I Representation incompatible with (among others):I freedom: it delegates (⇒ alienates) political will at the cost

of genuine self-government and autonomy.

People might enjoy security, private rights, and freedom frominterference but they might still not be free if they are not directlyresponsible through common deliberation, decision, and action forthe policies that determine their common lives.

From Direct Democracy to Strong Democracy

In strong democracy citizens govern themselves directly:⇒ Not necessarily at every level and in every instance, butfrequently enough, and when basic/important policies are decided.

It is not the only form of direct democracy, according to Barber.

Unitary direct democracy (seeks consensus).Risk: citizens identified or merged with the state/general will.X Small face-to-face communities× Fascism

Strong Democracy - Resolution of conflict

How is conflict resolved, in absence of independent grounds?

⇒ A participatory process of self-legislation and the creation of apolitical community capable of transforming:

dependent private individuals ⇒ free citizenspartial and private interests ⇒ public goods

I freedom: comes as a result of the process

I public ends: forged through public participation, commondeliberation, common action

Strong Democracy - Competence

Politics should be an activity of qualified people.

⇒ “Specialists” and “experts” have as only distinctivequalification the fact that they engage in politics.⇒ Problem of implementation of representative democracy.

Our age is too complex and technical for the average citizento make choices.

⇒ Citizens just have to employ judgment to evaluate opinions interms of value priorities.

Strong Democracy - Mob behavior and self-destruction

Danger for tyranny and irrationalism of the community.What if people democratically abdicate their own right toself-rule?

⇒ For irrationalism and mob behavior: rely on reasonableness,commonality, participation and their cultivation (which is one ofthe defining traits of strong democracy, via adequate institutions).⇒ For self-destruction: the citizen community should be createdso that preservation of autonomy is more sacred than its exercise.⇒ Quick (optimistic?) way out to philosophical objection.

Strong Democracy - Apathy and Selfishness of Citizens

The common citizen is often apathetic towards politics.

⇒ In Democracy participation breeds participation.⇒ People do not participate if they think that it doesn’t matter.

Masses are selfish and they mostly care about privateinterests. Representatives know better what is their best.

⇒ The real problem is giving decisional power to people(referenda on complicated subjects) without providing

I Adequate information

I Full debate

I Protection from money and media pressures/manipulation

Strong Democratic Institutions - Desiderata

1. Be realistic and workable;

2. Be compatible with the primary representative institutions(strong democracy has to come without revolution);

3. Address the anxieties about propensities to irrationalism,prejudice, uniformity, and intolerance ⇒ Offer safeguards forindividuals & minorities;

4. Deal with obstacles to participation: scale, technology,complexity, paradox of parochialism;

5. Make possible the government of non-professional citizens.

I Institutions to be taken all together, or not at all.

Strong Democratic Talk

I Neighborhood Assemblies (5000 ∼ 25000 citizens)I Place for public debate on local/national issues ⇒ Place for

self-regulation, vote at local/national level, civictelecommunication;

I Weekly meetings when working people and parents available;I 1st task: decide the agenda;I Participation optional;I Located in a specific building;I Presence of moderators.

Strong Democratic Talk

I Television Town MeetingsI Forums for regional and national talk (problem of scale);I Direct participation, but regional and national

communication;I Technology used for education, access to information and

communication.

I Civic Communication CooperativeI Institution to protect from media abuse and manipulation,

to experiment new forms of broadcasting, to regulateelectronic voting, . . . ;

I Checked by a congressional watchdog committee.

⇒ Who watches the watchmen?

Strong Democratic Talk

I Civic Education Postal ActI Subsidized postal rates for civic educational publishing on

pertinent political information;I The less popular the point of view, the greater the need for

subsidy (but attention to single eccentrics and mavericks).

I Civic Videotex ServiceI Under the aegis of the CCC;I Regular news + discussion of issues +

technical/political/economic data.⇒ Cannot force people to watch and inform themselves⇒ Risk for manipulation of information, depending on the CCC

and the congress committee

I Supplementary InstitutionsI Citizens in charge of local offices for roads, water, housing,

education, etc. (little competence or responsibility required);⇒ ∼ Jury duty. Is the freedom of citizens respected here?;I Elected by lot + system of rotation + minimal training.

Strong Democratic Decision-Making

I National Initiative and Referendum Process

(a) Legislative initiative coming from the people (signaturecollection)

(b) Mandatory tie-in with neighborhood assemblies and televisiontown meetings for civic education (topic in the local agendas)

(c) Multi-choice format (to enforce discussion + understand betterwhat people think)

(d) Two-stage voting process (vote twice, with 6 months ofdiscussion in between)

I Electronic voteI To be casted in a public place (unless health problems).

Strong Democratic Action

I 1 year (min.) of Universal Citizen Service for every citizen

I Local Options: crime-watchers, cleaning public places, . . .(voluntary)

I Workplace: decision making shared by workers andmanagement

I Architecture and design of neighborhood to enhanceparticipation

Strong democracy is obtained by adding participatory elements(step by step) to already existing representative institutions.

Representative Democracy - Conceptual Analysis

Pitkin (1967)

Representation is acting in the interest of the represented, in amanner that is responsive to them.

⇒ The representative must act independently with judgment.She must act so that there is (normally) no conflict with therepresented; if it occurs, an explanation is called for in terms of theinterests of the represented.⇒ The represented must be conceived as capable of action andjudgment (not merely being taken care of). They act through theirgovernment and they are not passive recipients of its actions.

Representative Democracy - Conceptual Analysis

The extremes are not part of the concept altogether.

× Adult taking care of a child.

× Scientist solving a technical problem (not pursuing interests).

× A person who merly consults and reflects.

Political questions are about what should be done: theyinvolve both facts and value commitments.

× Trivialities (e.g. choosing between two foods at a restaurant).

× True or false (an expert can answer).

Discussion on direct democracy

I Are we just dissatisfied with how the representative system isimplemented?

I Shall the issues be decided in a yes/no manner or withmultiple choices?

I How to take into account minorities, after the public hasspoken and the decision has been made?

I How to provide pertinent information to citizens?

I How do we protect voters from being subject tomanipulation?

References

Barber, B. (1984). Strong Democracy, Berkeley, University of

California Press, (chapters 7 & 10).

Christiano, T. (2015). ”Democracy”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), <http://plato.stanford.

edu/archives/spr2015/entries/democracy/>.

Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The Concept of Representation, Berkeley,

University of California Press, (pp. 209–240).