In Athens, because the majority of citizens had to be convinced if
the community were to act, it seems a very high standard of infor-
mation and debate was often obtained alongside great commitment
and loyalty to the state. In such a system individual citizens are
encouraged to inform themselves, treated as moral beings with self-
determination and are likely to identify with the community and its
political life.
It is often thought that such direct democracies are no longer
possible with the increased complexity and scale of human societies.
However, decision making by the majority of citizens is still prac-
tised in Switzerland, and in several states of the United States. In
Switzerland, on the initiative of a fixed proportion of the electorate or
a minimum number of voters, a referendum must be held on any
issue, and the result has the status of a constitutional amendment. In
several US states similar arrangements apply particularly on major
financial decisions. Again where decisions are made in this way there
is commonly a very widespread popular debate on all the issues
raised.
Such a situation should perhaps be distinguished from the much
more common constitutional device of allowing or requiring the
government to call a popular vote on particular issues. The problem is
that such a referendum on specific issues may easily be converted into
a ‘plebiscite’ – a vote of confidence in the government proposing
the vote. Strong populist leaders, such as France’s General de Gaulle
or Russia’s President Yeltsin, have often used such a device to
strengthen themselves against parliamentary opponents.
Today the size of modern democracies is no longer a barrier to the
exercise of Athenian democracy. The existence of mass communi-
cation, the Internet and the possibility of electronic polling through
the telephone or other networks means that ‘teledemocracy’ is now a
possibility (Arterton, 1987; Saward, 1993; Budge, 1996; Arblaster,
2002). In any case it is still possible to exercise this form of control in
small communities on a local level (e.g. British and New England
parish meetings).
The idea of involving as many citizens as possible in the govern-
mental process remains an important element in the concept of
democracy, helping to support the maintenance of the local govern-
ment system and the jury in Anglo-American democracies. The
former USSR attempted to support its ‘democratic’ credentials by the172 DEMOCRACY