The Role and Limits of Representative Democracy: An Analysis from Joseph Schumpeter, Robert Dahl, and Anthony Downs

Jochua Abrão Baloi

doi:10.11648/j.jpsir.20190204.11

Abstract

This article comes about with the objective of analyzing in a comparative way the role and limits of representative democracy in the perspective of Joseph Schumpeter, Robert Dahl and Anthony Downs. In practice, it seeks to understand the ideas launched by these three theorists in the quest for a perception of what will become a democracy and its importance in the formation and constitution of the modern democracies. The central argument presented in this article is that in a truly democratic political system, popular participation is an essential element for the construction and execution of political actions. J. Schumpeter conceives democracy as a method that societies use to elect their representatives. R. Dahl conceives it as a polyarchy where both, the degree of incorporation of individuals and the level of institutionalization must be maximized and, A. Downs conceives democracy as a type of government where there should be fair and periodic elections, and one or more parties must compete for government control. Therefore, it is by analyzing the political thinking regarding the power and the representative democracy of these theorists that one perceives how the State left its natural character, thus assuming its civil personality, through the formation of the social contract.

Highlights

This article discusses the role and limits of representative democracy from the perspective of Joseph Schumpeter (1883-1950), Robert Dahl (1915-2014) and Anthony Downs (1930-), taking as a research focus their works, “Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy”, “A Preface to Democratic Theory” and “An Economic Theory of Democracy”, respectively.This article shows that for Schumpeter, democracy is conceived as a method that societies use to elect their representatives, i.e, individuals have the power to decide through competition and popular vote
Power is shared between government groups and external interests that put pressure on them. This approach provides a detailed description of decision-making processes and analysis of the individual influences of groups and / or organizations on political processes” [8]. These elements contribute to the conception of its democracy as a polyarchy, i.e, a modern type of democratic government, in which is only possible in pluralistic societies, where the decentralization of power is presupposed, and where citizens can group freely to represent their interests in the political process
The essential characteristic of democracy in its model is linked to the continued responsiveness of government to the preferences of its citizens, in the production of public policies, for political participation and representation, and that all are politically equal. These factual elements lead to the formulation that, in Dahl, the model of his polyarchy consists on the existence of democratic institutions that act as instruments of protection for the governed and that the political participation of citizens for the functioning of democracy is fundamental

Summary

Introduction

This article shows that for Schumpeter, democracy is conceived as a method that societies use to elect their representatives, i.e, individuals have the power to decide through competition and popular vote. These elements contribute to the conception of its democracy as a polyarchy, i.e, a modern type of democratic government, in which is only possible in pluralistic societies, where the decentralization of power is presupposed, and where citizens can group freely to represent their interests in the political process.

Results

Conclusion