Electoral systems and voting behaviour June 2006
Writen by Conor Newman (December 2007).
4.)
To fully understand the term direct democracy, one must first understand the Governmental system of Democracy. This word comes from Ancient Greek, literally meaning ‘rule of the people’ or ‘rule of the majority’. This essentially means that, rather than having an individual or a select few holding the power, it is the majority of the people who make the decisions. This was first really seen in Ancient Athens, a city-state in Greece where everyone eligible to (essentially all men except slaves and immigrants-so only a relatively small proportion of the population!) could discuss, debate and vote on all decision making and elections. This was, in fact, what is called a direct democracy. This then, is a ‘purer’ form of democracy where the people collectively make the decisions and go about all the businesses of Government, rather than electing leaders. This contrasts strongly with a representative or liberal democracy, where the people elect representatives to represent them in Government. In modern times, a ‘true’ direct democracy is unsuitable for a modern state-decisions need to be made quickly and without the expense and time wasting of consulting every person involved. Instead, a form of direct democracy commonly used in representative democracies is the use of referendums. These are questions put to the electorate that consist of usually ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answers, about a specific topic. An example of this was in France and the Netherlands where the people voted against the EU constitution, or in Lichtenstein where the people voted to grant the Prince more powers. In the UK, there has only been one referendum that has been put to the entire electorate, and that was the 1975 referendum on whether the UK should remain in the EU.
Plan
-What are democracy, direct democracy, and referendums?
-Advantages of referendums over elections: reinforces mandate theory, unites divided parties etc
-Disadvantages: tyranny of the majority, referendums timed to suit ruling party etc
Introduction
In this answer I will be arguing for the fact that referendums do represent a more democratic form of participation in certain circumstances, through a variety of different theories and examples.
Democracy and Referendums
Democracy is a form of government whereby the people (in theory) hold the power. Most modern democracies(called liberal or representative democracies) consist of the electorate voting for candidates who represent their views in the Government, so that the people are not directly in power but their representatives are still accountable to them. Originally, however, democracies were more direct. The entire electorate would meet and debate on issues, and a vote would be taken with all those eligible to vote included. This was seen in Ancient Athens, where all men who were not slaves or immigrants could vote (although very few actually bothered to turn up). Since then, direct democracy has been frowned upon as being unsuitable and unwieldy in a modern society. Instead, the idea of referendums has been developed. This is when an issue is put to the people for them to vote upon. The idea behind this is that if there is an issue which the Government cannot decide for itself or wishes to see the view of the electorate, then they can make a referendum and see what the general public think. There are many advantages and disadvantages to this, as we shall see.
Arguments for referendums over elections
A referendum is, by definition, a more direct form of democracy. It allows the people to be directly involved in the decision making, and effectively gives the people more power than they would have before. What this does for the party in power is that it reinforces their mandate and deals with the mandate theories’ flaws. The mandate theory is the idea that when the electors vote for a party, they essentially grant that party their consent to carry out the policies stated in their manifesto. The problem with this theory in the UK is that, due to the first-past-the-post electoral system, the majority of people very rarely vote for the same party; this means that a party never really gets a true mandate. This would be solved through referendums because only if a majority vote for an issue will the issue actually be solved-so, over 50% of the electorate would have to vote either yes or no, granting a clear mandate for that issue, and also reinforcing the mandate of the party in power. This shows a more democratic form of participation over elections because it grants a more definite mandate than elections, and so the people are actually giving their true consent for the Government to carry out the proposed idea-this means the people have more power than they would do with simply elections.
Another way in which referendums are more democratic than elections is in the fact that a referendum will generally get a larger turnout than an election. In an FPTP election in the UK, turnout is usually quite low-in 2005 it was around 60%, and it rarely goes far above this percentage. This means that, actually, only just over half of the population is actually directly participating in politics and democracy. In a referendum, turnout is much higher. This is because when people vote in a referendum they know that their vote will be counted; in a referendum, every vote goes towards the total, whereas in an election most votes are effectively ‘wasted’. This is because the FPTP system is not proportional, and so the number of votes does not directly correlate with the number of seats gained in the legislature (Parliament). A referendum is more democratic then, because it involves a greater proportion of the electorate actually voting since they feel that their vote will not be wasted and that they are actually making a difference-thus, the people hold the power, and so the system is more democratic.
Arguments against referendums over elections
Despite these arguments, it is debatable whether referendums are truly more democratic than elections. Firstly, referendums can be made at a time or in a certain way that suits the party in power. This can be done in a variety of ways. The party in power may create the referendum at the time of an event that may affect the turnout or decision that is made, or during a time where support for the party of the proposed policy is at an all-time high. For example, if in the UK support for the EU was extremely low and the majority of the population was against it, then if the Government created a referendum asking whether we wanted to stay in the EU, then the people would almost definitely vote ‘no’, even though at a different time they may have voted ‘yes’. Furthermore, the wording of the question can affect the way people vote. The question can be biased against or for the policy; an exaggerated and unrealistic example would be if the referendum was phrased like, “The majority of people in the UK want to stay in the EU. Do you think the UK should stay in the UK?” This example is extremely unlikely, but the bias of the question can be much more subtle than this. This can influence the way people vote, thus making it less democratic since the Government are influencing the way people think. In an election, on the other hand, there are fewer influences on the way we vote-there are no real questions, just a simple tick box for which candidate we prefer, and the ballots are completely secret.
Referendums are also less democratic in the way that there can often be no limit on the number of referendums held. If the decision that the people come to is not what the Government wanted, then they could simply hold another referendum and keep holding votes until the decision they want is made. This happens in several European countries. This makes the process less democratic because the people are not the ones actually making the decisions; the referendum is essentially a ‘fake’, making it seem as if the people are being given a choice, but in fact the Government just keeps holding referendums until the decision they want is made. In an election, this does not generally occur. Before an election in the UK, Parliament is dissolved, so once the election is held the legislature must be refilled again with the MPs that have been elected. Although the people may not be directly participating, they are at least given a choice between parties and the election is not being faked.
Conclusion
Overall then, I believe that referendums are a more democratic way of participating in politics than elections. They involve the people participating more directly and actually affecting the decision making of the Government. However, there must be certain checks and balances in place to make sure that the Government cannot word or time the referendum in a way that affects the electorate’s decision, and laws should be in place that prevent the Government from holding more than one referendum in a short space of time.