ABSTRACT In The Principles of Representative Government (1997), Bernard Manin argues that the means of selection, elections producing representative democracy and drawing lots applied in direct democracy, create fundamentally different kinds of government. I argue that Manin's typology holds firm, but that it needs some modification. First, Daniela Cammack's analysis of the Athenian system for the impact of ‘interest' and ‘accountability' reveals representative elements within the Athenian direct democracy, further clarified with the distinction between ‘synecdochical' (part-for-the-whole) and ‘metaphorical' (transformed) representation as defined by Frank Ankersmit. Next, with these parameters, I investigate the multiple offices (archai) at Athens. In the selection of officials, a significant turn occurs from the means and conditions (synecdoche) to the outcome (metaphor), rendering the difference between allotted offices and elected ones arguably one of degree, rather than of kind. This inquiry further suggests that archē, the right to act with authority over one’s fellow citizens, holds by its very nature an element of representational distance and inequality that even drawing lots from all with high rotation cannot fully undo. This insight is relevant to any analysis of drawing lots for office in a political system in other historical periods as well as today.

This paper examines the Kurdish revolution in Syria, centered on the autonomous administration of Rojava, through the framework of social movement theories, with particular emphasis on political opportunity structure (POS) as the primary analytical lens. Emerging amid the instability of the Syrian Civil War, Kurdish actors capitalised on shifting political conditions and state withdrawal to establish a decentralised system of governance rooted in democratic confederalism, emphasising direct democracy, gender equality, and cultural pluralism. To explain the emergence, development, and resilience of this revolutionary project, the paper employs a multi-theoretical approach in which resource mobilisation, framing, new social movements, and contentious politics theories serve as complementary perspectives. Together, these frameworks demonstrate how the Kurdish revolution mobilised resources, constructed political narratives, and evolved in response to regional and international pressures. The paper argues that the Rojava experience represents a significant case of political transformation shaped primarily by changing political opportunities in a precarious regional environment.

Bandwagon or Titanic? How outcome expectations influence voting in direct democracy

We investigate whether physical attractiveness is associated with the behavior of elected politicians towards their voters, extending prior research that has focused on beauty's effects on electoral success. Leveraging the institutional features of Swiss politics, namely, mandatory disclosure of interest group affiliations and direct democracy allowing the identification of voter preferences, we link independent beauty ratings of Swiss politicians (provided by Australian participants unfamiliar with them) to two key behavioral outcomes: (i) the number of interest group affiliations and (ii) alignment with revealed voter preferences. We find that better-looking politicians are not more prone to “rent-seeking” through interest group affiliations. Moreover, better-looking politicians do not deviate more from their voters' preferences. These findings generally hold across the political spectrum, suggesting that in political systems with transparency regarding incumbents' behavior, there is little room for beauty-related advantages or disadvantages.

Between 2019 and 2021, six states expanded Medicaid through voter-approved ballot initiatives, overcoming legislative opposition. We used 2016-23 data from the American Community Survey to compare health insurance coverage outcomes in these six ballot initiative states with those in ten nonexpansion states. We estimated stacked event study regression models to account for variation in expansion timing and control for socioeconomic differences. Overall, ballot initiative expansions increased Medicaid enrollment by 3.2percentage points and decreased uninsurance by 2.2percentage points among nonelderly adults two years after expansion. Among low-income adults, Medicaid coverage increased by 10.1percentage points, and uninsurance fell by 6.2percentage points. These findings show that Medicaid expansions enacted through ballot initiatives significantly increased coverage, even in politically resistant environments. However, sustaining these gains may be difficult amid ongoing state-level opposition and new federal mandates. As opportunities for future ballot-driven expansions narrow, this study highlights both the potential and the limitations of direct democracy in advancing health policy.

Direct or representative democracy? Co-Voting!

ABSTRACT This paper asks: What is digital democracy? It outlines some foundations of a theory of digital democracy and introduces a novel approach. A review of influential understandings of digital democracy shows the dominance of the two models of deliberative and participatory democracy. In the contemporary poly-crisis of world society, there is an antagonism between digital communicative participation and digital fascism. Participation and deliberation can result in participatory fascism and deliberative fascism. As a consequence, we need an understanding of digital democracy that goes beyond the pure stress on participatory and deliberative digital democracy and foregrounds the potential combination of constitutional democracy on the one side and deliberative and participatory democracy on the other side. This paper suggests a novel approach to conceptualizing digital democracy that is multi-perspectival, multidimensional, non-dualistic, and based on a dialectic of technology and society. It suggests a typology of digital democracy that consists of four dimensions and six related and interacting models of democracy: constitutionalist digital democracy, representative digital democracy, direct digital democracy, pluralist digital democracy, deliberative digital democracy, and participatory digital democracy.

Abstract We study how citizens' right to directly decide on policies through popular initiatives affects the attractiveness of extreme candidates in representative elections. In our theoretical framework, single prominent policy issues on which individual voters hold extreme views get a large weight in their assessment of candidates, thereby favouring ideologically extreme ones. If citizens can decide the controversial policy issues separately on the ballot, then this decouples the issues from legislative politics, and moderate candidates become relatively more attractive to voters. We apply our theory to US state legislative elections, and find that ideologically extreme candidates receive significantly lower voter support in initiative than in non‐initiative states. This holds in particular for states with low qualification requirements for initiatives. In concurrent elections for the US House of Representatives, we do not observe this difference in the electoral success of extreme candidates between initiative and non‐initiative states. The effect seems to be partly mediated by lower campaign donations to extreme candidates.

Since its introduction in 2002, the Citizen Audit Request System has operated to this day with the status of a supplementary mechanism to representative democracy?that is, control through the direct participation of citizens. As government accountability is emphasized, public-private cooperation? where citizens or the private sector participate directly in the public sector, is receiving attention in policy decision-making, implementation, and even control within the public sector. Furthermore, government transparency and citizen participation in the policy-making process have established themselves as agendas of the times. In line with this global trend, the importance of systems that guarantee citizen participation or cooperation in establishing audit processes or audit entities is growing significantly within the field of auditing. Given that the realization of direct democracy through the direct participation of citizens in modern democratic societies inherently has limitations, representative democracy, in which citizens participate in state affairs through representative bodies they elect, emerges as the fundamental form of democracy. Therefore, the election of representatives and the control of those elected representatives become the core elements. In this regard, the citizen audit request system holds value in direct democracy by enabling citizens to exercise an opportunity for such control. Ultimately, the function of the citizen audit request system is fundamentally to complement the limitations of representative democracy and to function as a participatory democratic institution. Furthermore, the system serves to alleviate the workload of audit bodies in selecting areas subject to audit. It functions to identify areas where audits are necessary and where their effectiveness can be maximized amidst a wide range of circumstances regarding the scope and targets of audits. Therefore, it is crucial to design the system to prevent misuse as a means solely for the protection of the rights and interests of private individuals, and to ensure that it is utilized as a tool for administrative control, which is the inherent function of auditing. Now that approximately 20 years have passed since the enactment of the citizen audit request system, it is time to examine whether its operation is being conducted appropriately in accordance with its legislative intent and original function. In proportion to the increased authority of the Board of Audit and Inspection and the resulting immense national and social impact, so-called audit request systems?which demand audits by the Board?are being operated in various ways based on laws and subordinate regulations. Under these circumstances, this study examines the origins and evolution of the citizen audit request system, analyzes the operational limitations of the system relative to the legislative intent, and reviews improvement measures to overcome these limitations.

ABSTRACT This article examines a recent wave of student-led protests in Serbia and describes how direct democratic practices—participatory plenums—have emerged as adaptive responses to political constraints in a hybrid regime. Sparked by a tragic infrastructural failure that caused the death of 16 people in Novi Sad in November 2024, the mobilization quickly spread across major university centers, combining blockades of higher-education institutions with decentralized tactics and calls for local engagement. Through the analytical lens of direct democracy, and guided by theories of deliberation, affects, and contingency, the article examines how students strategically navigate a landscape shaped by state capture, deepening autocratization, media domination, and limited channels for political agency. Based on interviews conducted at two university units in Belgrade and Novi Sad, the study illustrates how plenums function less as ideological commitments and more as pragmatic strategies for circumventing repression, facilitating collective deliberation, and maintaining agency. Although students recognize the challenges and limited scalability of these models, they emphasize the plenum’s ability to rebuild trust and serve as an effective public voice in a hostile environment. The article highlights the potential of direct democracy and flexible organizational forms for collective mobilization, challenging entrenched power dynamics in constrained political conditions.

The political crisis in France is not institutional in nature. The founders of the Fifth Republic took great care to ensure that the system met the requirements of a wellfunctioning democracy. The lack of a political majority in the National Assembly is a consequence of the crisis of the party system and has emerged despite the existence of well-developed constitutional safeguards and electoral rules. In the current state of the party system, a departure from presidentialism, or rather a return to the parliamentary system known from the Third and Fourth Republics, poses a risk to the stability and decision-making power of the system. Therefore, I am critical of the part of the reform package that provides for the transfer of power from the president to the prime minister. However, it can be argued that constitutional changes strengthening direct democracy and forms of civic participation will give momentum to French democracy and may force reforms within the political parties themselves.

The standard model of representative democracy is increasingly challenged. Partly because of the tight historical and theoretical connection between representative democracy and political parties, it is not well understood how the latter relate to other models of democracy. Whereas previous studies have examined ideology and populism to explain why parties differ in the conceptions of democracy they advance, we argue that personalism, as expressed in party organization, is part of the story. Combining data from PPDB and V-Party, we analyze the relationship between party personalism and opposing models of democracy for 194 parties from 38 countries. Centralized personalism goes together with supporting direct democracy, illiberalism, and majoritarianism. In contrast, parties exhibiting a high degree of decentralized personalism tend towards liberalism and consensus democracy. When the “rules of the game” are not universally accepted anymore, we need to understand better which players seek to make changes and why.

This paper aims to distinctly demonstrate the prevalence and impact of strategic voting within representative democratic systems as compared to direct democracy, focusing on tax policy decisions. Through a comparative analysis, we explore how the structure of the voting system influences the strategic behaviour of voters concerning their taxable income. Our findings indicate that representative democracy inherently encourages strategic voting more than direct democracy, primarily due to the delegation process and its interaction with local median voters. This study meticulously analyses how pivotal voters in both the wealthiest and poorest electoral districts demonstrate notable sincerity in their voting behaviour, contrasting sharply with the strategic tendencies of the “median of the medians.” Additionally, we observe that higher income tax rates significantly enhance resources available for redistribution, thus intensifying incentives for strategic voting. Conversely, greater benefits from public expenditures promote sincerity among voters. Furthermore, both electoral systems align with Meltzer and Richard's (1981) predictions. By highlighting these dynamics, our paper contributes to a better understanding of the implications of democratic structures on voter behaviour and fiscal policy outcomes, underscoring the critical influence of voting systems on strategic decision-making in taxation. • Differentiating strategic and sincere voting is crucial for collective decisions. • Representative democracy fosters strategic voting, influenced by delegation. • Higher tax rates intensify strategic voting. • Sincere voting is positively linked to public expenditure benefits. • Institutional design is crucial to align tax policies with voters' true preferences.

Abstract For many years, political scientists have debated over voter competence in direct democracy. At the core of the discussion is whether this central institution enlightens citizens about political facts. However, scholars have primarily examined if direct democracy fosters general political knowledge even though referendums and ballot initiatives are policy-specific in nature, as citizens vote on particular political proposals. By utilising a range of unique panel survey data collected around four Danish European Union referendums, I show that voters’ knowledge of policy-specific information markedly increased during the campaigns. I also combine the survey data with an original media content analysis and find that the learning of issue-specific facts is more related to the opportunities provided by the media information environment than to individual ability or motivation. These results suggest that a broad group of voters acquire policy-specific facts that help them make informed choices when they are granted full control of political decision-making.

Abstract The global rise of deliberative democratic innovations, particularly minipublics such as citizens’ assemblies and deliberative polls, has been marked by uneven adoption across advanced democracies. While some countries have integrated these mechanisms into their democratic frameworks, others remain hesitant, raising questions about the institutional conditions that facilitate or hinder their adoption. This study employs qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to examine how configurations of three key institutional dimensions – consensus democracy, federalism, and direct democracy – shape the adoption of minipublics. Our findings reveal that minipublics are more likely to be adopted in majoritarian systems with strong federalism and limited direct democracy, where they address participatory gaps. Conversely, systems combining high consensus democracy and extensive direct democratic mechanisms, such as Switzerland, often exhibit lower adoption rates, as existing power-sharing structures fulfil similar deliberative functions.

Populist radical right parties often position themselves at the edges of the political spectrum, particularly at the national level, where they adopt strong nationalist, anti-immigration, and anti-elitist stances. However, these positions often lose relevance at the local level. Local governments have limited power over migration, local elites are embedded within their communities, and broader political frameworks remain unchangeable. This article examines how the Czech radical right party Freedom and Direct Democracy (SPD) operates locally in the 2018 and 2022 municipal elections. By manually coding 188 electoral manifestos from 141 municipalities, it shows considerable variation in the party’s local strategies. In some municipalities, manifestos contain no signs of populism or radical stances on immigration and nativism. In others, the SPD constructs “the people” and “the elite” in a populist way and adopts clear anti-immigration and nationalist positions, illustrating the diverse nature of its local-level strategies.

The article presents a comprehensive historical and legal analysis of the process of formation of Cossack statehood at the Zaporizhian Sich and determines the place and role of the Kosh Otaman in the state and legal mechanism of Cossack society. Special attention is paid to the study of the powers of the Kosh Otaman in the context of the functioning of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of power, as well as to the mechanisms of their interaction within the military-republican system of the Zaporizhian Sich. Based on the analysis of historical and legal sources and the works of Ukrainian scholars, it is demonstrated that the Zaporizhian Sich constituted a unique form of political and legal organization that combined elements of direct democracy, the elective nature of public authorities, collegial decision-making, and a strong personalized executive power. The central institution within the system of governing bodies was the Sich (General Military) Council, which functioned as the supreme legislative, administrative, and judicial authority. Its decisions were binding on all members of the Cossack community, including the Kosh Otaman and the military elite. The author establishes that the Kosh Otaman occupied a special place in the state and legal mechanism of the Zaporizhian Sich and effectively performed the functions of the head of the Cossack polity. The institution of the Kosh Otaman was elective and limited in term, which significantly distinguished it from monarchical forms of rule and simultaneously ensured the democratic nature of power. The election of the Kosh Otaman was carried out by the General Military Council, which also remained the primary body exercising control over his activities. The article examines the powers of the Kosh Otaman in the legislative sphere. It is substantiated that he was not an independent subject of law-making in the modern sense; however, he played a key role in the procedural support of the legislative process. His competences included convening and opening the Sich Council, organizing its work, promulgating adopted decisions, and ensuring their implementation. Legislative power at the Sich was collegial in nature and was based on the principle of the supremacy of the will of the Cossack community, which excluded the possibility of unilateral adoption of normative acts by the Kosh Otaman. The main emphasis is placed on the scope of the Kosh Otaman’s powers within the executive branch of government, where he acted as the central official. He headed the Kosh of the Zaporizhian Host, the military-administrative government of the Sich, which included the military judge, clerk (scribe), osaul, and other members of the senior officer corps. The Kosh Otaman exercised overall command of the army, organized military campaigns, was responsible for maintaining internal order, supervised financial and economic affairs, controlled the distribution of land and resources, and represented the Zaporizhian Sich in external relations. A separate aspect of the study is devoted to the judicial powers of the Kosh Otaman. It is proven that despite the collegial nature of judicial proceedings at the Zaporizhian Sich, in serious criminal cases the Kosh Otaman acted as the highest judicial authority. He was entitled to make final decisions or to refer the most significant cases for consideration by the council of senior officers or the General Military Council.

Direct democracy is often used to shape state-level health policy, and while prior research has studied determinants of success for ballot measures generally, examination of healthcare-related measures (HRM) remains limited. This study addressed four questions: (1) are HRM more likely to pass than non-healthcare-related measures (NHRM); (2) do HRM engage voters more than NHRM; (3) do HRM draw more oppositional campaign spending than NHRM; and (4) among HRM, what characteristics predict success? We identified 96 HRM in 34 states from 2010-2024 and 352 NHRM that appeared alongside them on the same ballot (n = 448). Using regression analyses to examine campaign outcomes, ballot completion, and spending, we controlled for initiative- and election-level covariates. Sensitivity analyses adjusted for "moral issues" (i.e., measures pertaining to abortion and euthanasia) and supermajority passage requirements. Findings indicate that HRM drew greater voter engagement and were significantly more likely to pass than NHRM. Furthermore, increased oppositional spending was associated with lower odds of success for all measures. Results indicate that interest groups and voters view HRM pertaining to "morality" differently and among HRM, oppositional spending is the strongest predictor of success. Additional research is needed on voter preparedness when it comes to healthcare policy on the ballot.

ABSTRACT This study examines the relationship between authoritarian predispositions and support for various democratic models across 22 European countries. Drawing on recent research in political psychology, authoritarianism is conceptualized as a predisposition to prioritize social conformity over individual autonomy. The findings reveal that authoritarian predispositions are positively associated with support for social, direct, and delegative democracy. Notably, support for direct and delegative democracy rises with authoritarianism across the ideological spectrum, suggesting a psychological preference for majoritarian unity, strong leadership, and institutional bypass. Interaction models show that authoritarian tendencies are not necessarily incompatible with liberal democracy; support for liberal and social democracy actually increases with authoritarian predispositions on the right, but decreases on the left. No robust relationship is found with populist and populist-participatory democracy. Country-specific analyses reveal notable cross-national variation, underscoring the role of institutional and discursive environments. The findings imply that although authoritarians are psychologically inclined to support semi-authoritarian forms of democracy, their predispositions act as filters, not fixed positions. Taken together, the complex interplay of predispositions, ideological beliefs, and national context may produce varying democratic preferences. The meaning of democracy is dynamic and can be framed in ways that align with the authoritarian need for order and conformity.

This study critically examines the legality and democratic legitimacy of the proposed 2026 referendum in Bangladesh, with a particular focus on the constitutional role of interim governments and the scope of judicial review. Despite the growing global use of referendums as tools of direct democracy, the Bangladeshi Constitution provides no comprehensive procedural framework for initiating such votes, and transitional authorities possess limited competence to undertake binding constitutional actions. Using a doctrinal qualitative methodology, the research analyses constitutional texts, judicial precedents, comparative South Asian jurisprudence, and scholarly literature to evaluate whether the referendum aligns with principles of constitutional supremacy, institutional competence, and procedural democratic integrity. The findings reveal that the referendum faces multiple legal vulnerabilities: lack of explicit constitutional authorisation, overreach by non-elected authorities, oversimplified binary questions undermining informed voter choice, and underutilization of judicial review mechanisms. The study demonstrates that democratic legitimacy cannot substitute for constitutional legality, emphasising that courts must serve as guardians of constitutional order to prevent plebiscitary erosion of constitutionalism. Comparative evidence from India and Sri Lanka further underscores the need for pre-emptive judicial scrutiny and clear procedural safeguards in referendum processes. The research contributes to constitutional theory by highlighting the interplay between legality, legitimacy, and transitional governance, offering insights for policymakers, the judiciary, and scholars on ensuring that referendums in Bangladesh adhere to both legal and democratic standards. Keywords: Referendum legality, Judicial review, Bangladesh Constitution, Interim government, Democratic legitimacy, Constitutional supremacy, Transitional governance