How Will The Promotion Of Justice And Democracy In The United States Affect My Life?

Today, almost everyone is in favor of democracy. Nearly every measure undertaken by our government, whether foreign or domestic is legitimated by invoking the term 'democracy'—whether it is the invasion of another country or the privatization of social security. Similarly, the economic marketplace is often spoken of as 'democratic', with consumers 'voting' their preferences with their dollars. Likewise, the expansion of stock ownership through pension systems and IRAs is sometimes claimed to represent the democratization of capitalism. Opportunity for upward social mobility is likewise spoken of as democratic. Even fast food chains that allow you to have your hamburger 'your way,' suggest that such 'free choice' is democratic. It seems that everything is being marketed as 'democratic' these days. In other words, it is a much abused concept.

The fact of the matter is that democracy is an essentially contested concept. It is a term that contains differing and competing definitions suggesting different constructions of reality. Such a contested concept presupposes implicit assumptions and functions as an ideological concept that legitimates differing social practices and power relations. What I would like to do today is unpack some of the theoretical and political baggage contained in this contested concept.

Specifically, I want to sort out two of the main, competing concepts of democracy now current. One is the concept of popular or participatory democracy; the other is elitist democracy. The first is the classical idea suggested in the original Greek word which referred to the rule or power, cratos, of the people, demos. In this sense, 'democracy' means people's power.

But in the contemporary world, 'democracy' has come to mean rule by a political elite so long as it has been elected by popular vote. In presenting this competing definition this way I am not just loading the deck against it. In fact, I am simply reflecting the way advocates of this concept themselves understand it. An elitist theory of democracy has become the canonical idea among US political scientists, politicians, journalists and other opinion-makers.

For them, 'democracy' means the selection of political decision-makers from among competing elites by means of popular elections. Most accept Joseph Schumpeter's definition of 'democracy' as “that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people's vote.” As he put it, the role of the people is simply to produce a government. The people are sovereign only on Election Day. Once they have done their job, they should go back to their private affairs and leave governing to the elite they have selected.

The 18th century French philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau had a very different concept. In fact, anticipating Schumpeter, he attacked this idea in the following words:

The English nation thinks it is free, but is greatly mistaken, for it is so only during the election of members of Parliament; as soon as they are elected, it is enslaved and counts for ...