- Many issues are not discussed at general elections so, if the people are to
decide, they need to vote on them directly- Even postal ballots and the print media let alone two-way communication
devices allow interactive debate and voting among physically separated citizens.- Politicians do not necessarily show expertise and interest. Participation
expands citizen capacities. Citizens currently spend a lot of time informing
themselves about politics through TV and radio.- Expertise is important but not infallible. In any case it can inform popular
decisions. Modern representative (party) democracies are heavily imbalanced
against popular participation.- Those who vote against decisions do not consent to them. But this problem is
general and not conWned to direct democracy. Voting on issues one by one
gives minorities more voice. - Arbitrary decisions may emerge from cyclic voting. But such problems are
generic to all democratic voting procedures. Voting on dichotomous
questions one by one (the usual procedure in popular policy consultations)
eliminates cyclical voting and guarantees a majority.- Direct democracy does nothaveto be unmediated. Parties and governments
could play the same role as in representative (party) democracies today.
The last point, of those listed above, is perhaps the most relevant today since
modern democracyislargely party democracy. Curiously, the debate on the merits
of direct vs. representative democracy has generally ignored the major political
innovation of the last century, the development of the mass political party. Direct
policy voting by all citizens through referendums and initiatives has been con-
trasted with classic early nineteenth-century election of individual representatives
on their own merits, rather than on the basis of common party programs. It is
assumed that representatives will use their own judgment in deciding on policy,
exposing themselves to popular opinion only when they come up for re-election.
However, parties now mainly compete by oVering ideologically diVerentiated
policy programs to the electorate. ‘‘Representative democracy’’ in its modern form
thus adds up to direct policy voting. But in contrast to ‘‘direct democracy,’’ as
classically and currently conceived, this is voting on a package of policies rather
than on each individual policy within the package. This could make a diVerence.
Voting on policies individually, one by one, cannot be absolutely guaranteed to
produce the same outcome as voting on a policy package as a whole—though of
course it generally may (Budge 1996 , 143 , for an illustration).
However, one thing is clear—all democracies these days and all forms of
democracy, involve elections based on policy choices. Any idea that parties
or elected individuals can proceed exclusively, or even largely, on their own
judgment simply ignores reality. The real debate is whether package voting
of policy under ‘‘representative’’ democracy is more or less democratic than
individual votes on policy, or vice versa.
direct democracy 597