Politics & International Relations
Elite Democracy
Elite democracy is a political system in which a small group of individuals, often from the economic or political elite, hold significant power and influence over decision-making processes. This model emphasizes the role of a select few in shaping policies and governing the society, potentially leading to unequal representation and limited participation from the broader population.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
12 Key excerpts on "Elite Democracy"
eBook - PDFThe Irony of Democracy
An Uncommon Introduction to American Politics
- Louis Schubert, Thomas Dye, Harmon Zeigler, , Louis Schubert, Thomas Dye, Harmon Zeigler, , Louis Schubert, Thomas Dye, Harmon Zeigler(Authors)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Cengage Learning EMEA(Publisher)
Elitism does not pretend that power in society does not shift over time and that new elites do not emerge to compete with old elites. Power need not rest exclusively on the control of economic resources but may rest instead upon other leadership resources — organization, com-munication, or information. Lastly, elitism does not imply that masses have no impact on the attitudes of elites, only that elites influence masses more than masses influence elites. THE MEANING OF DEMOCRACY While the term “ democracy ” has been used in different ways throughout history, at its core it refers to popular participation in the allocation of values in a society. (The Greek roots demos and kratos refer to “ people ” and “ rule, ” respectively.) The ruled and the rulers are the same. The Founders looked to classical under-standings of the concept of democracy, where the term was used by the Greek political philosopher Aristotle 6 as describing a corrupt form of government in which the masses ruled in their self-interest and not in the interest of the country, what James Madison called “ the tyranny of the majority. ” The term demos was more a synonym for “ mob. ” The modern term democracy conflates its negative original meaning with the positive form of government called polity (in Latin res publica , or republic). At least some of the ironic gap between the United States as an elite-run political system and the ideals of democracy is in the common misun-derstanding of the term “ democracy ” itself. Chapter 2 will clarify this further. T HE I RONY OF D EMOCRACY 5 Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience.
eBook - PDFGlobal Democracy
The Case for a World Government
- Torbjörn Tännsjö(Author)
- 2008(Publication Date)
- Edinburgh University Press(Publisher)
Still, on the model advocated in this book, the world government would be sovereign in its decisions about which level a certain decision belongs; to the global one, to a national one, or to a transnational one, designed intentionally for the handling of the kind of problem in question. Democracy 75 3. Ideals of democracy: elitism The representative political system should not be conflated with another technique for reaching collective decisions, which has also been called ‘democratic’, but where I find it less clear that it really is close enough to the mark to earn the right to be so-called. I think here of a system where no attempt is made to have any will of the people prevail; the idea is simply that those who rule the people acquire their mandate in a certain way: through a competitive struggle for the people’s vote. Such a system is ‘democratic’ according to Joseph Schumpeter’s influential definition of democracy where, ‘The democratic method is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competing struggle for the people’s vote.’ 6 Political systems satisfying Schumpeter’s requirement, but not the requirements articulated by me, are typically systems where only two major parties compete. A method of approaching such a system is, of course, to have a majoritarian election method. For a political system to have any chance of meeting the strong (classical, populist) requirements articulated by me it needs to rely on many parties and a way of achieving such a system is to have a strictly proportionate electoral system. It should be noted that, in a representative democracy of the kind here described, the electorate decides political matters democrati-cally through their representatives. However, their choice of repre-sentatives is not democratic. In a representative system, a delegate, who is disliked by a majority, may well come to be elected.
- W. Nylen, L. Dodd(Authors)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
Elitist Democracy We find ourselves today in an unhealthy situation where the powerful, well connected, and intolerant have become extremely well adept at using those institutions and procedures to further concentrate wealth and power among themselves. 10 In the process, what were originally constituted as inclusionary mechanisms are transformed into mechanisms of exclusion. This is what I call “Elitist Democracy.” In the United States, socio-economic influence and political-institutional control/exclusion come together primarily in the realm of campaign financing 4 ● Participatory versus Elitist Democracy: Brazil and in the political propaganda that emerges from the now-constant campaign process. 11 Politicians from both major parties are dependent on wealthy individuals and corporations to finance their increasingly expensive runs for office. Political fund-raising becomes a full-time activity, oftentimes requiring more time from incumbents than legislating or administering the public good. At the same time, the present and future interests of large donors have become increasingly dependent upon decisions (and, perhaps even more important, on non decisions) made in the halls of Congress and in the Executive branch, as well as in the interpretive “spin” that both parties put on events and political agenda items. 12 Both parties, in fact, have done their utmost to make us dislike—and, therefore, turn our attention away from—democratic politics and govern- ment. Since the early 1980s, the Republican Party has been phenomenally successful in waging war against the State, routinely identified with an inherently out-of-touch “Big Government” full of lazy bureaucrats distribut- ing tax-guzzling government handouts to the undeserving poor-because-they- want-to-be-poor.
eBook - PDFDemocracy
Problems and Perspectives
- Roland Axtmann(Author)
- 2007(Publication Date)
- EUP(Publisher)
It is within this Weberian and Schumpeterian tradition that contemporary democratic elitism considers elite 126 The Globalisation of Democracy competition for electoral support as a key element of a democratic system. In elections, the passive and disorganised mass of voters becomes the arbiter of the political conflict. Elections enable the masses to remove from power an elite group which is unresponsive to their wishes. Furthermore, the multiplicity of sectional elites, their relative autonomy from each other based on their respective control of resources, and the relative autonomy of some other elites from the elites of the state and government restrict elite power (Etzioni-Halevy 1993). It is this model of Schumpeterian ‘elite’ democracy that under-pins the democracy promotion with its strong emphasis on elections that we discussed in the first half of this chapter. The political contestation between hardliners and softliners of an authoritarian regime may lead to political liberalisation and thus create an opening for ‘democratisation’. This may lead to a break-through to democracy as the old regime collapses and a democratic regime based on a new constitution and national elections takes its place. This breakthrough must then be consolidated in the post-transition period. According to democratic elite theorists, just as the transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one is engineered through elite transactions, so the consolidation of democ-racies requires rational and reasonable elite behaviour. Dahl’s optimal path to stable polyarchy was characterised by the rise of political competition that preceded the expansion of political participation. The culture of democracy first took root among a small elite and only later diffused to the larger population as it became gradually incor-porated into electoral politics (Dahl 1971: 33–6).
eBook - ePubClasses and Elites in Democracy and Democratization
A Collection of Readings
- Eva Etzioni Halevy(Author)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
Similarly, for Aron, what most clearly distinguishes Western democratic from autocratic regimes is the dissociation and independence of leading minorities, or elites. Also distinctive to democracy is the free and legitimate mutual competition of the claimants to such positions, based on free elections and on consensus over the rules of the game. All this cannot ensure effective participation in the decision-making process for all, but it ensures some elite response to the needs and demands of the public.Democratic elite theorists thus share the idea that the distinctiveness of democracy lies not only in free competitive elections, but also in the autonomy of elites from each other, which enables them to countervail each others power. Thereby power restrains power, increasing the liberty of the public and the elites' responsiveness to its demands. In opposition to this it has been argued that these supposed virtues of democracy are more fiction than reality, that those who believe in them are overly complacent with respect to democracy. Further, the argument is that these theorists have offered not merely an elite but an elitist theory of democracy, one which applauds elite rule, while paying insufficient attention to the democratic role of the public. As well, they are said to have disregarded the exploitative nature of capitalism—the economic system in which democracy prevails—and its persistent economic inequalities. Before deciding in favor or against these critiques, those against whom they are leveled must be allowed to have their say.Notes1 Mosca’s concept of the ruling class differs substantially from the Marxist conception of this class, as evident from the pertinent writings in Part I of this volume.
Passage contains an image
Selections from the Works ofVilfredo ParetoThe Governing Élite in Present-Day Democracy
[Élites and Non-élites]
Let us assume that in every branch of human activity each individual is given an index which stands as a sign of his capacity, very much the way grades are given in the various subjects in examinations in school. The highest type of lawyer, for instance, will be given 10. The man who does not get a client will be given 1—reserving zero for the man who is an out-and-out idiot. To the man who has made his millions—honestly or dishonestly as the case may be—we will give 10. To the man who has earned his thousands we will give 6; to such as just manage to keep out of the poor house, 1, keeping zero for those who get in . . .
Available until 15 Jan |Learn moreThe Role of Local Political Elites in East Central Europe
A Descriptive Inquiry into Local Leadership in Six Transitional Democracies of the Region
- Roxana Marin(Author)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- Budrich Academic Press(Publisher)
In effect, political elites are “persons at or near the top of the ‘pyramid of power’” (Putnam 1976: 14), “persons with the ‘organized capacity 18 to make real and continuing political trouble without being promptly re-pressed ’” (Higley and Burton 2006: 7 [italics added]). Defenders of democracy took offence at the slight odds which this most lauded regime was offered. Liberty and equality were brought to the fore, as universal suffrage was deemed the foundation of all sound government for it ensured that the general will shall be expressed and popular sovereignty will be entrusted to its chosen representatives. However, the rationale that elites, thus dignified under the name of representatives, are decided by the will of the people is somewhat inexact. In this respect the argument is forced into the di-rection of representation and the accompanying “mandate-independence con-troversy”, which has become an ordinary and familiar subject of discussion. The controversy resides in deciding whether the representative is to do what his constituents urge him to do or what he thinks best. The beginning and the first half of the 20th century advanced the shift, not only towards an “over-consciousness” of the power gap between elites and the masses, but, paradoxically enough, the acknowledgement of the fact that polit-ical elites were, as an intrinsic rule, deprived of any moral prominence over the led masses, they actually eluded any moral stance of excellence and preva-lence 1 . Therefore, probably, the veritable transmutation within the academia in respect to the moral overview on the political elites and the fashion of de-fining this group through the lances of ethic excellence and intellectual preemi-nence is to be found at the beginning of the last century, with the triptych of Italian “elitists” Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca and Robert Michels.
eBook - PDFDemocracy and Democratization
Post-Communist Europe in Comparative Perspective
- John D Nagle, Alison Mahr(Authors)
- 1999(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications Ltd(Publisher)
Thus Western dominance, in politics, finances and security, provides some politica l correctness guidelines against outright dictatorship. The real question is whether the weak democratic state can be made strong in the substantive sense of working on behalf of citizen interests as ELITES AND CITIZENS 225 expressed through a broad-based democratic plura lism. In the absence of a political economy which could more effectively require elite attention to public concerns, and a democratically elected regime with a state capacity for satisfying public needs, these regimes may for some time consolidate as Schumpeterian elite democracies, meeting formal pro-cedural requirements but not promoting and even blocking the evolution towards a civic democratic culture.
eBook - PDF- Matevž Tomšic(Author)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Peter Lang Group(Publisher)
It is a political system that protects human rights and political liberties (on individual and collective bases, i.e. the right to different minorities), where political activity occurs on an openly voluntary basis and permanent and effective control over the ruling elite exists. Electoral democracy 13 is characterised by the fact that, although elements related to the electoral process function relatively well, there are nevertheless certain serious deficiencies regarding other aspects of democratic political life, especially the protection of people’s rights and liberties. Usually there is harass- ment or even persecution of certain social groups, widespread abuse of power in the hands of authorities in the form of illegal arrests, torture or even political murders. Further, there is a lack of accountability of elected political representa- tives. Although this is often a consequence of objective circumstances, particu- larly violent conflicts or even (usually civil) wars, the absence of efficient control over power holders strongly contributes to such conduct. 12 This classification is based on the assessment of the level of freedom in countries all over the world provided every year by the American non-governmental organisation Freedom House. 13 For such a regime that in practice represents a combination of democracy and autoc- racy, some authors use the term ‘illiberal democracy’ (Zakaria 1997; Davenport 2000). 30 One can speak about pseudo-democracy when there are certain demo- cratic attributes like the existence of political parties and multi-party elections but where the domination of one political party or group is so overwhelming (in terms of the concentration of different – repressive, financial, informational etc. – resources in its hands) that the electoral outcome is determined in ad- vance. In this way, political pluralism is very limited and formal democracy works more or less as a facade of actual authoritarianism.
eBook - PDF- George Lambie(Author)
- 2010(Publication Date)
- Pluto Press(Publisher)
Within this representative, or neo-liberal, form of democracy, it is essential to have regular free elections with one person one vote, in which the will of the majority (of like-minded individuals) becomes the basis for policy, even if it is a limited majority. The right to impose this will is passed on to an elected representative body which holds power and makes binding decisions on behalf of the electorate. This involves an implicit assumption about humans WESTERN LIBERAL DEMOCRACY 105 as independent individuals who make choices that maximise their utility. There are no extensive consultation processes for establishing particular choices, because it is assumed that as long as the policies promote subjective preferences, then the market will adjust, reject or account for diversity through the price mechanism. This is, in some respects, the application to politics of the economic theory of perfect competition. In practice, the limits of individual freedom are contained within the parameters of the market and the ‘rule of money’. The problem with reducing democracy to an act of individual electoral choice, giving power to representatives whose agendas are shaped by non-democratic forces, is that it allows the unequal power structures within the private sphere to be further consolidated. As Gunter Grass (cited in Raby 2006:47) notes, ‘parliament is no longer sovereign in its decisions. It depends on powerful pressure groups – the banks and multinationals – which are not subject to any democratic control. Democracy has become a pawn to the dictates of globally volatile capital.’ The Developmentalist View: Constructive/Structuralist Democracy Those theorists who support the economic/developmentalist route to democracy have a different view of what constitutes human nature: Man is innately programmed in such a way that he needs culture to complete him ...
Available until 15 Jan |Learn more- Subrata K. Mitra, Malte Pehl, Clemes Spiess, Subrata K. Mitra, Malte Pehl, Clemes Spiess(Authors)
- 2009(Publication Date)
- Verlag Barbara Budrich(Publisher)
4.5 Conclusion The previously flagging interest in democracy has recently been revived by transitions to democracy in various parts of the world on the one hand, and by newly evident, and violent, opposition to Western, liberal democracy on the other hand. This renewed interest in democracy has brought into the limelight the analyses in the social sciences in general, and in political sociology in par-ticular, that point to the great complexity of this regime. It has brought – or returned – to the limelight the analyses that focus on the diversity of factors that promote, or conversely subvert, this regime, including elites and the relations among elites themselves, and those between elites and the public. This has gone hand in hand with a renewed awareness of the fact that de-mocracy prevails in societies that are permeated not only by power, but also by socio-economic inequalities, and are therefore divided into classes. There has been a renewed awareness of the fact that the quality of democracy thus depends not only on the relations between elites and the public at large, but also on the relations (or lack thereof) between elites and classes. There has been a special emphasis on the fact that linkages, between elites and the dis-advantaged classes (or categories) of the public, lead to a decrease of inequalities and foster democracy, while cutting-off or an absence of such linkages has the opposite effect. Interest in democracy has also been revived by globalization, which has raised the question of whether democracy can be transnationalized. The first Socio-Political Inequalities 87 question has been whether transnational governance organizations can be democratic. In view of serious deficiencies in democratic linkages of such bodies and their elites with the disadvantaged parts of the public, newfound interest has also been fanned in the recently proliferating transnational grass-roots movements that challenge these governance organizations.
eBook - PDFThe Will of the People
Populism and Citizen Participation in Latin America
- Yanina Welp(Author)
- 2022(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter(Publisher)
Chapter 5 The elite’s (lack of an) answer At the root of the increasing popularity of far-right interests in the democratic world is the breakdown in expectations that future generations will live better than their parents. It may sound contradictory, but while one might expect the global growth of inequalities registered since the 1980s to translate into more de- mands for redistribution, what has been observed is an unprecedented increase in nationalism and identity politics. And more surprisingly, this is happening in the consolidated democracies in Europe and the United States.¹ It may be just a consequence of the non-lineal relationship between socio-economic conditions and politics, which is often underestimated. But beyond what is happening in the long-standing democracies of the West, the countries of Latin America only partially follow the described trend. Although the region has been histori- cally characterised as the most economically unequal in the world, the first de- cades of the 21st century were also those of the emergence of new political proj- ects aimed at economic redistribution, social inclusion and cultural recognition (at least in theory and / or initially, as happened with Chavismo in Venezuela and Alianza País in Ecuador, among others). In Europe and the Americas, if exclusion and / or inequality created the breeding ground for incendiary anti-status quo and anti-partisan speeches, the responses of the actors of the status quo have focused on the defence of demo- cratic institutions as a guarantee of freedom and prosperity which are not mas- sively perceived as such by important sectors of the population. This centres the discussion on the Western model of liberal democracy. Such a model is offered by the traditional elites as the only valid form of democracy and from there it is defended.
eBook - PDFTransnational Actors in Global Governance
Patterns, Explanations and Implications
- Christer Jönsson, Jonas Tallberg(Authors)
- 2010(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
Modern democracy has gone hand in hand with an electoral system in which citizens choose rep- resentatives to stand for them or act on their behalf. If many theorists have criticized the electoral system for its structural exclusion of histor- ically marginalized groups, they have often tried to accommodate their criticism within the confines of the electoral system. The strategy has been to find various mechanisms (e.g., group representation, quotas) by which to enhance inclusion, and so to make the electoral system more accountable to the electorate as a whole. The problem is, though, that under global political conditions there are actors and institutions that stand outside of any such system of authorization and accountabil- ity, but whose decision-making capacities nevertheless are strongly felt around the world. This circumstance has not only triggered new mod- els of global accountability (e.g. Grant and Keohane, 2005); it has also led to a more profound critique of the electoral system itself (e.g. Dryzek and Niemeyer, 2008; Saward, 2008; Urbinati and Warren, 2008). According to Michael Saward (2008: 2), we ought to recognize that, while an important feature of contemporary democracy, elections can sometimes “act to restrict the nature and range of representative per- spectives and voices.” Characteristic of the electoral system is that rep- resentatives represent the interests of their own electorates. However, there are also global issues − environmental, economic, political, and cultural − that span different electorates. If representation is limited to election, many of these issues will go unaccounted for. For while “we can choose particular politicians ... we cannot choose to have politicians who will not participate within the compromises and constraints of the electoral game” (Saward, 2008: 5).
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
