Democracy and Political Participation
A detailed mindmap on everything (If I have missed anything from it please comment below) on Unit 1 Topic 1: Democracy and Political Participation in Edexcel AS Politics.
- Created by: Louiselenka
- Created on: 14-05-17 13:08
View mindmap
- Democracy and Political Participation
- Definitions
- Democracy
- A political system based on the idea that government should serve the interests of the people.
- Direct Democracy
- The people themselves directly make the important decisions which affect them
- The people are directly consulted on political decisions
- Action taken by the people shapes political
decisions (via protests, strikes, E-Petitions)
- E-petitions
- 10,000 + = written statement in response – forces government to be accountable
- 100,000 + = eligible for House of Commons debate
- E-petitions
- Advantages
- Decisions may be more accepted
- Disperses power widely among population
- Increases democracy as it increases participation
- Purest form of democracy
- Disadvantages
- Direct Democracy = Tyranny of the majority
- Many decisions may be too complex for the people to understand
- Can create emotional rather than rational responses from the people
- Undermines the role of elected representatives
- Representative Democracy
- The people elect representatives from different political parties to form an assembly which represent the people
- These representatives form an assembly which reflects the will of the people
- Representatives govern in the interests of all sections of society
- How should a representative act?
- Burkean Representaiton
- Use their own judgement rather than follow the exact wishes of their electors or party
- Delegation
- Follow very closely the wishes of those who elected the representative
- Parliamentary Representation
- Representatives should strike a balance between their own judgement, the wishes of their electors and the policies of their political party
- Burkean Representaiton
- Features of a representative democracy
- There are free elections to representative assemblies
- There government rule ‘for the people’
- Political associations and pressure groups operate freely and represent various causes, believes and interest groups
- The rule of law
- Advantages
- Representatives are accountable and therefore act responsibly
- Representatives may have superior experience to the general population
- Representatives more likely to make rational judgements
- Disadvantages
- Party representation prevents representatives acting independently
- Representative democracy is only ‘fair’ if elections are ‘fair
- Representatives may not accurately reflect the opinions of the wider population
- Representative Democracy in the UK
- MPs represent their constituencies
- E.g - Tom Brake = MP for Carshalton and Wallington – fought on behalf of constituents to stop St.Helier being closed
- The Houses of Parliament represent different views in society
- E.g - In recent debates on tuition fees, MPs have represented the views of students, universities and business leaders
- Mainstream parties represent the whole nation
- E.g -Labour claim to represent ‘the national interest’ rather than just the interest of one social class – “the one-nation party” – Ed Milliband
- Pressure Groups tend to represent different interests
- E.g - The Countryside Alliance represented the views of their members against Tony Blair’s Labour government
- The media represents their readers views
- E.g - The Daily Mail represents the anti-immigration views of its readers
- MPs represent their constituencies
- Criticisms of Representative Democracy in the UK
- Elections to the UK parliament are unfair, with some parties being over-represented (Labour) and some being under-represented (Liberal Democrats)
- HOL has considerable power, but is not electedeing under-represented (Liberal Democrats)
- Some pressure groups are more powerful than others under-represented (Liberal Democrats)
- Reduces accountability of the government under-represented (Liberal Democrats)
- No clear link to MEPs /body> under-represented (Liberal Democrats)
- Governments are not truly representative as they
are always elected with the minority of the electorates vote.
- E.g – 2005-2010 Labour government was elected with only 35% of the popular vote
- Liberal Democracy
- Normally incorporates a bill of rights to protect the interests of individuals and minorities
- Power is normally divided and separated – ‘separation of powers’ distributes power between different branches of government
- There is a system of ‘checks and balances’ that allows these branches to control each others powers
- Strong safeguards on freedoms control each others powers
- Tolerant society
- Is the UK a liberal democracy?
- Features that conform
- There are free regular and fair elections
- Government is accountable to the people and parliament
- Parties and pressure groups are tolerated
- Features that do not conform
- No codified and entrenched constitution
- House of Lords and Head of State is not elected
- PM has arbitrary powers
- Mixed conformity
- Elections by FPTP are seen as unfair
- Rights are protected by can be set aside my Parliament
- No separation of powers between the legislature and executive (govt)
- Features that conform
- Parliamentary Democracy
- Representative democracy in the UK is often described as parliamentary democracy because parliament dominates the political system and representation traditionally occurs through parliament.
- Parliament is sovereign and has ultimate power
- Laws will only be enforced if legitimised by the UK parliament
- Government is drawn from parliament
- Parliament ensures the geographical and social representation of all parts of the UK
- Pluralist Democracy
- Minority cultures and ideas are tolerated
- Power is widely dispersed
- A wider range of groups and ideologies can flourish
- Views are protected
- Different views compete with and balance each other
- Is there a democratic deficit in the UK?
- Yes
- Apathy and feel of disconnection from politics
- House of Lords is unelected, mostly appointed – not given consent
- Low turnout at elections – population has not given consent and so threatens legitimacy and theory of the mandate
- E.g -59% 2001 general election
- Parliament and devolved assemblies are not socially represented – women less represented and views not accounted for
- No
- More proportional systems – more coalitions and therefore more party representation
- Healthy party competition – three parties wield in the HOC and devolved assemblies are even more competitive
- More referendum use – direct democracy and people making decisions
- Free and fair elections – there is a real choice of parties and free press and media
- Yes
- Has the UK political system become more democratic in recent years?
- Yes
- Increased membership of pressure group
- E.g – New social movements like Occupy
- Use of more proportional systems to elect representatives
- E.g. – PR – STV and Party List
- Devolution
- Increased use of referendums
- E.g – 2011 AV Referendum = NO
- Increased membership of pressure group
- No
- Unelected HOL and Head of State
- Low turnout and low party membership
- No English devoution
- Parliament is not socially representative
- E.g – women and minority views not accounted for
- Some pressure groups are not internally democratic
- E.g – FA Chairman is appointed not elected by its members
- Yes
- Legitimacy
- The extent to which a government has the right to rule and exercise power.
- Power
- The ability to make someone do something that they would not do of their own free will
- For example: Coercion: The use of force to achieve ends -> The military
- Authority
- The right to exercise power (based on the consent of those being ruled)
- For example: Legal / Rational = HOC Traditional = HOL
- Democracy
- Modern Democracies have...
- The government is accountable to the people
- Political tolerance
- The rule of law
- Free, fair and regular elections
- Freedom of the media
- Peaceful transition of power
- What makes a government legitimate?
- Referendums ('Yes' answers)
- High turnout rates
- Free, fair and regular elections
- Lack of dissent
- Displays of public support
- How legitimate is the UK?
- Legitimate
- HOC is elected
- Government is elected with the mandate to govern
- HOL has traditional authority and political influence is widely recognised
- Not legitimate
- The electoral system (FPTP) is unfair and distorts political representation
- Every government elected has only achieved the minority of the popular vote
- House of Lords members are not elected and so do not have the people’s consent
- Legitimate
- Political Participation in the UK
- Joining a political party / pressure group
- Voting regularly in elections and referendums
- Participating in strikes and other forms of direct democracy
- Referendums
- A referendum is a popular vote where the people are asked to decide on an important political or constitutional issue directly
- Key features
- Government chooses when to hold them
- Form of Direct Democracy
- Always Yes/No answer
- Results are not binding on parliament
- Why are they held?
- To make constitutional changes legitimate
- To entrench constitutional change
- To prevent splits in the governing party
- Previous Referendums
- 2011
- Should AV be adopted for Westminster elections?
- The coalition was divided on the issue and important constitutional change
- A large ‘no’ vote on a low turnout
- Should AV be adopted for Westminster elections?
- 1998
- Northern Ireland
- Should the Belfast agreement be approved to bring peace and power sharing to Northern Ireland?
- Needed the approval of both sides of the community after years of conflict
- A large ‘yes’ majority with a high turnout
- Should the Belfast agreement be approved to bring peace and power sharing to Northern Ireland?
- Northern Ireland
- 2016
- Brexit
- A close result of 51.9% voting to leave
- Parliament was divided on the issue of remaining or leaving the EU
- Brexit
- 1997
- Scotland
- Should Scotland have its own parliament with significant powers?
- Wales
- Should Wales have an elected assembly with modest powers?
- An important constitutional change
- A narrow ‘yes’ majority with a low turnout
- Should Wales have an elected assembly with modest powers?
- Tony Blair was PM
- Scotland
- 1975
- Should the UK remain part of the European community?
- National
- The newly elected Labour government were split under this issue
- A large 'Yes' majority
- Harold Wilson PM at the time
- Should the UK remain part of the European community?
- 2011
- Advantages
- Legitimacy and consent
- Confirm citizen consent to government and have the right to rule
- Prevent unpopular decisions
- People have the ability to stop the government making unpopular decisions, therefore keeping support.
- E.g. – 2004 North-East Referendum
- Participation
- Encouraging direct democracy
- Prevent government splits
- Give population decision to prevent government splitting and causing a need for a new election
- E.g. – 1975 referendum on EU membership - 2016 Brexit referendum
- Entrenchment
- Referendums entrench changes and prevent future governments from reversing the decisions made
- E.g. – 1998 Scottish Devolution referendum = YES.
- Political education
- Referendum campaigns area chance to educate the public on a political matter
- E.g. - 1975 referendum on membership of European Community - 2016 Brexit referendum
- Legitimacy and consent
- Disadvantages
- Complexity
- Many issues are too complex for the average person to make a judgement on. This leads decisions to be based on emotion or simplistic tabloid symbols.
- Results can lack legitimacy
- Where turnout is low, we cannot truly say that the people have given their consent to the decision. Therefore the result lacks legitimacy.
- E.g. – 1998 London Mayor referendum = 34% turnout
- Cost
- Referendums are costly and expensive, especially in times of economic hardship
- E.g - Av Referendum cost Westminster £75 million
- Tyranny of the majority
- Democracy implies that the views of all minorities are heard. But in a referendum only the majority are heard
- E.g -Euthanasia
- Undermines the role of representatves
- When people make their own decisions through referendums, they may challenge the decision of their elected representatives and undermines the role and importance of parliament
- Voter fatigue
- The more referendums held, the lower turnout becomes. Voters become tired of voting.
- Protest vote
- The people may use a referendum to show their unhappiness with the government, rather than focusing on the issues
- E.g. – did people vote no in the 2004 North East England referendum because John Prescott and the Labour government were unpopular
- Complexity
- Why has the use of referendums increased since 1997?
- Referendums entrench reform and so cannot be easily reversed by parties who have different philosophical ideas (e.g – the Labour and Conservative party)
- It is believed that the electorate are better informed about politics than ever before and are better able to make informed judgements
- Since 1997 there has been a greater interest in constitutional reform and is considered important that any such reform receives direct consent of the people
- Should there be further use of referendums in the UK?
- Against
- Tabloid may reduce the rational arguments and lead to emotional appeals
- It may make worse the already low level of respect people have for representative institutions
- Too many votes = voter fatigue – may hinder legitimacy and turnout
- For
- People are becoming more accustomed to being consulted on key issues
- Easier to inform people about issues because of the internet and social media
- May get people more involved in the political processes
- Against
- UK democracy
- Criticisms
- Political Institutions
- The powers of the PM are not subject to law (only conventional)
- Some ‘undemocratic’ institutions
- E.g – the HOLs and Head of state
- The European Convention on Human Rights can be overturned because Parliament is sovereign
- Political participation
- Party membership falling (less than 1% are members of a party)
- Lack of identification with party policies
- Turnout at elections is low and been falling in recent years
- E.g – 2005-2010 Labour government was elected with only 35% of the popular vote
- Political processes
- Elections are considered to be unfair and undemocratic under FPTP
- Smaller parties are under-represented
- Parliament is relatively weak in its ability to call government to account
- Political Institutions
- Strengths
- Political processes
- Free media and access to information
- Elections are free and held regularly
- Pressure groups access to various levels of government (access points)
- Political Institutions
- The rule of law applies
- There are free political parties and pressure groups
- Strong representation of individuals and constituencies by MPs
- Political participation
- All competent adults are permitted to participate in political processes
- Direct forms of political action on single issues are increasing
- E.g – 2010 NUS protests on uni fees
- Freedom of association, thought and belief
- Political processes
- Ways of strengthening
- Use of electronic methods - Use electronic methods of voting and participation
- Disadvantages
- Not everyone has acess
- Higher risk of tampered votes
- Advantages
- Cheaper
- Prevents voter fatigue, therefore able to make decisions more regularly
- Disadvantages
- An elected head of state - Replace monarch with an elected president
- Advantages
- Improves accountability
- More legitimate
- Can easily remove
- Disadvantages
- Lose tradition and tourism
- Removed public, non-political figure
- Advantages
- Increased use of referendums - Put more laws directly to the public
- Advantages
- Raises political awareness
- Public will take part in democracy more
- Disadvantages
- Undermines representatives
- Voter apathy
- Advantages
- Changing voting systems for HOC - Choose a different voting system which gives a fairer outcome
- Advantages
- Smaller parties have a better chance
- Fewer wasted votes
- Disadvantages
- Weaker governments – more coalitions = unstable
- Long debates for an alternative voting system
- Advantages
- Reduction of the voting age - Allow citizens to vote at 16 instead of 18
- Advantages
- Allows them to vote on the issues that affect them
- May increase turnout in future
- Other aspects of citizenship available at this age why not the right to vote?
- Disadvantages
- Voter Apathy
- Undermines representatives
- Advantages
- Greater political education in schools - Set aside more time in schools for students to study politics
- Advantages
- Increases political awareness
- Turnout may increase
- Disadvantages
- Not enough time for extra subjects
- Expensive to implement
- Advantages
- Use of electronic methods - Use electronic methods of voting and participation
- Criticisms
- Should voting be compulsory?
- Yes
- Election campaigns cheaper
- Increases political awareness
- Makes voting a responsibility not just a right
- Increases turnout – increases legitimacy
- Decreases corruption
- Serves the interests of all classes
- No
- Other methods may be more effective and doesn’t deal with underline problem
- Expensive system to implement and unpractical
- Potentially compromises the right not to vote
- Increases uneducated votes – tyranny of the majority
- Would favour big, well-known parties
- Yes
- Definitions
Comments
No comments have yet been made