As a pioneer in democracy, a country famous for her democratic traditions and also considered as a role model for democracy by countries worldwide, Britain has began her journey towards democracy since King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215. Henceforth she became the “mother of parliament” in 1295; in passing the Bill of Rights of 1689 she further limited the power of the sovereignty; till the she gave women the right to vote in 1928; her history is a history of humans’ ceaseless efforts in pursuing democracy. Yet, despite her glorious past, has she still been stepping towards a more ideal democracy or has she walked back as her fame faded since the past decades? - In this essay I am going to examine whether the United Kingdom nowadays could still qualify as a democratic country based on two criteria from Dahl’s On Democracy – effectiveness of participation and the equality of …show more content…
I shall measure this by the turnout at the major Referendums held in the past 10 years in the UK. Secondly, I shall also look at the voters’ turnout in the General Elections, by-elections and local elections that took place in the United Kingdom in the recent decade.
Another indicator of effective participation is public opinions, which can be measured from the differences in statistics between a public poll and the actual voting results in each general election, by-election or referendum, the differences of the number of people who registered to vote and the number of people who actually voted, and Euro barometer surveys.
Another indicator that I shall use to measure the effectiveness of participation is whether the voters are educated, which I shall refer to the British education system and the literacy rate of its voters. For which I shall use the relevant parts in the British
In this essay I will argue that British General Elections should be conducted using a system of Proportional Representation. First, I will argue that the system would be more democratic as every vote that is cast would be represented and this ...
The results of recent elections in Britain have raised many significant questions about the current political situation in the country, particularly concerning the electoral system. Therefore, the problem of “crisis” in Britain’s democracy has been the subject of wide speculation among analysts and political scientists over recent years. In addition, it is widely recognized that the traditional electoral system in the UK - first past the post - is the main cause of that crisis and should be replaced as part of a plan to reconstitute the democratic culture (Kelly 2008). By longstanding critics of the system, opponents advocate the use of proportional representation (PR) for selecting MPs. Due to this problem, it is going to be a referendum on changing the electoral system of the country's parliamentary elections.
"Miller light and bud light…either way you end up with a mighty weak beer!" This is how Jim Hightower (a Texan populist speaker) described the choices that the U.S. electorate had in the 2000 elections. This insinuates that there is a clear lack of distinction between the parties. Along with numerous others, this is one of the reasons why the turnout is so low in the U.S. elections. In trying to explain the low figures at the U.S. elections, analysts have called American voters apathetic to indifferent to downright lazy. I disagree that the 50% (in recent elections) of voters that fail to turnout to vote are lazy and that they have just reason not too. I will also show that the problem lies within the system itself in that the institutional arrangements, electoral and governmental, do not create an environment that is conducive to mass participation. I will address these main issues and several others that have an effect on voter participation. In doing so I will compare America to other established democracies.
Before getting into these theories I feel it is important to provide a few important definitions, as well as, some important information to assure we are all on the same page. First, I would like to address the term, voter turnout. According to the Merriam- Webster dictionary (voter) turnout is the number of people who go to or participate in s...
Among the many ways Americans can participate in politics, voting is considered one of the most common and important ways for Americans to get involved. The outcome of any election, especially at the national level, determines who will be making and enforcing the laws that all Americans must abide by. With this in mind one might assume that all Americans are active voters, but studies show the voter turnout is actually astonishingly low. With this unsettling trend it is important to know what statistics say about voter turnout as was as the four major factors that influence participation: Socioeconomic status, education, political environment, and state electoral laws, in order to help boost turnout in future elections.
Nakhaie, M. R. (2006). Electoral participation in municipal, provincial and federal elections in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 39(2), 363-390.
Adding this all up, I have concluded that the United States democracy is unhealthy, yet I still believe there is hope. If I had to give the current condition of democracy a letter grade, I would give it a C. I got this grade because even though the United States maintains many civil right and liberties, a strong number of interest groups, and diverse political parties, it just isn’t enough to carry the poor conditions of ideologies, voter turnout, education, economics, and media. Democracy is surly not thriving in America, but at this point, there is still hope.
Many Americans hold different opinions or theories on how our government works. Some even take to writing what they believe in the hopes of finding someone with a similar view. There are three well-known theories of American Democracy, the elite theory, the pluralist theory, and the hyperpluralist theory. Each of these approaches all hold the relatively same belief, that Americans need someone powerful to govern and take control. Of the three theories, the elite theory best explains the American political process.
America's Democracy The United States of America is a republic, or representative democracy. Democracy, a word that comes to us from Greek, literally means the people rule (Romance, July 8). This broad definition leaves unanswered a few important details such as who are the people, how shall they rule, and what should they rule on (July 8). Defining the answers to those questions means defining a model for a democratic system.
"United States can be seen as the first liberal democracy. The United States Constitution, adopted in 1788, provided for an elected government and protected civil rights and liberties. On the American frontier, democracy became a way of life, with widespread social, economic and political equality. The system gradually evolved, from Jeffersonian Democracy or the First Party System to Jacksonian Democracy or the Second Party System and later to the Third Party System. In Reconstruction after the Civil War (late 1860s) the newly freed slaves became citizens, and they were given the vote as well." (Web, 1)
The Extent to Which Voting by Ethnic Minorities Reflects the Voting Behaviour of the Whole Electorate
The notion of where the United State is a republic and not a democracy is a frequent debate in the United States. Scholars haunt the dichotomy of direct democracy. Instead, the United States is a representative democracy. James Wilson, a framer of the Constitution, reinforced that the United State is a representative democracy and “the power is inherent in the people and is either exercised by themselves or by their representatives. Subsequent to the Founding Fathers, democracy has been comprehended to comprise representative democracy as likewise as direct democracy. Additionally, some scholars label the United States as a constitutional democracy and a republic.
There has been a lot of debate and research on the topic of political participation recently, but the authors of this article argue that through all of this debate and research we have neglected the groups of people that participate in favor of the shire number of participants. As the title suggests the article is about the unequal distribution of political participation between people of varying income and social status.
A common belief often held by individuals across the United Kingdom, and many other democracies, is that their one individual vote does not matter. However, there are a number of ways in which citizens participate, especially in a democratic country like the United Kingdom. With that said, there are a number of different ways that citizens can and do participate. Citizens have an influence on politics by voting, whether in local elections or the general election, by involvement in media, and by associating with a particular party. So citizens are often immersed in the culture of politics without even trying.
It is undisputable that there are mixed opinions on the topic of participation, Sherry, R Arnstein expresses suspicion in her views on the subject in her widely recognised article 'The Ladder of Citizen Participation', questioning both government and institutional plausibility in their acts regarding citizen participation.