<p>The purpose of this thesis is to investigate whether some positions in democratic theory should be adjusted or abandoned in view of internationalisation; and if adjusted, how. More specifically it pursues three different aims: to evaluate various attempts to explain levels of democracy as consequences of internationalisation; to investigate whether the taking into account of internationalisation reveals any reason to reconsider what democracy is or means; and to suggest normative interpretations that cohere with the adjustments of conceptual and explanatory democratic theory made in the course of meeting the other two aims.</p><p>When empirical methods are used, the scope of the study is restricted to West European parliamentary democracies and their international affairs. More particularly, the focus is on the making of budget policy in Britain, France, and Sweden after the Second World War, and recent budget policy in the European Union. The aspects of democracy empirically analysed are political autonomy, participation, and deliberation. The material considered includes parliamentary debates, official statistics, economic forecasts, elections manifestos, shadow budgets, general election turnouts, regulations of budget decision-making, and staff numbers in government and parliament budgetary divisions. </p><p>The study reaches the following conclusions among others. (i) The fact that internationalisation increases the divergence between those who make and those who are affected by decisions is not by itself a democratic problem that calls for political reform. (ii) That international organisations may have authorities delegated to them from democratic states is not sufficient to justify them democratically. Democratisation still needs to be undertaken. (iii) The fear that internationalisation dissolves a social trust necessary for political deliberation within nations seems to be unwarranted. If anything, views argued by others in domestic budgetary debate are taken increasingly serious during internationalisation. (iv) The major difficulty with deliberation seems to be its inability to transcend national boundaries. International deliberation at state level has not evolved in response to internationalisation and it is undeveloped in international institutions. (v) Democratic political autonomy diminishes during internationalisation with regard to income redistribution and policy areas taken over by international organisations, but it seems to increase in public spending. (vi) In the area of budget policy-making there are no signs that governments gain power at the expense of parliaments during internationalisation. (vii) To identify crucial democratic issues in a time of internationalisation and to make room for theoretical virtues like general applicability and normative fruitfulness, democracy may be defined as a kind of politics where as many as possible decide as much as possible.</p>

When Alexis de Tocqueville observed the spread of modern democracy across France, England, and the United States, he saw that democracy would give rise to a new state of letters, and that this new state of letters would influence how democratic citizens and statesmen would understand the new political world. As he reflected on this new intellectual sphere, Tocqueville became concerned that democracy would foster changes in language and thought that would stifle concepts and ideas essential to the preservation of intellectual and political liberty. In an effort to direct, refine, and reshape political thought in democracy, Tocqueville undertook a critique of the democratic state of letters, assessing intellectual life and contributing his own ideas and concepts to help citizens and statesmen think more coherently about democratic politics. Here, I analyze Tocqueville's critique and offer an account of his effort to reshape democratic political thought. I show that through his analyses of the role of intellectuals in democratic regimes, the influence of modern science on democratic public life, the intellectual habits that democracy fosters, and the power of literary works for shaping democratic self-understanding, Tocqueville succeeds in reshaping democratic language and thought in a manner that contributes to the preservation of intellectual and political liberty within the modern democratic world.

The topic of this dissertation is the democratic deficit of the European Union and the normative and empirical assessment of the likelihood that the existing forms of institutionalized transnational civic engagement would act as the point of anchoring democratic practices at the EU level. If the democratic deficit reflects the apparent lack of legitimacy and accountability of EU institutions and a lack of influence of its citizens, the question the project attempts to answer is why the existing democratic innovations within the EU constitutional framework fail to attract political allegiance and mobilization necessary for a functioning EU democracy? The thesis attempts to bridge the gap between normative political theory and more empirical and policy oriented approaches to the issue of EU democratic deficit. In a theoretical sense, this research covers a broad spectrum of topics within political theory and the theory of political culture. Parting ways with most of the current literature on the subject, which usually ends with institutional prescriptions derived from descriptions that rely on the nation-state as the benchmark for the prospects of democratisation of the EU, the project seeks to analyse the democratic innovations that the Lisbon treaty introduced within a more comprehensive framework of transnational deliberative democracy - demoicracy. The underlying idea behind the project is to apply, for the first time and with necessary modifications, the basic notions of the founders of the discipline of Political Culture, Almond and Verba, to the EU. That means to draw on their seminal work, ‘The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations’, and hypothesize that further democratization of EU decision-making requires a 'civic political culture'. By definition, it presupposes the dominance of 'participative' over 'subject' and 'parochial' dimensions of orientation towards the political system. After extensive theoretical and methodological considerations, following a brief investigation into political culture in the EU, the empirical focus shifts to the European Citizens’ Initiative and the framings around the struggle for its reform in order to draw findings on which types of political cultures the European Commission has fostered. The principle aim of the research is to investigate if and how the democratic legitimacy of the EU can be enhanced by a shift from a parochial and subject to a more participation-enhancing dynamics. / Doctorat en Sciences politiques et sociales / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-25T20:22:35Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Ronaldo Tadeu de Souza.pdf: 589010 bytes, checksum: c2d6046b6148efe03f72fd16fa7b513f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-11-26 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / This aims at studying the contemporary democratic theory, specifically, the study of theory elitist democracy of Joseph Schumpeter. The democratic theory and after World War II was decisively influenced by the ideas of democracy of Joseph Schumpeter. This means that the discipline of political science was also influenced by the ideas of democracy elitist of Schumpeter. The theory of Schumpeter on democracy sought resolve the question of how to limit the participation and assistance from the man of the people in the decisions of state. To answer this Schumpeter draws on some variables. Among those highlighted the parameters of the English parliamentary system and functionality of the social democrat parties. These two variables allowed Joseph Schumpeter to define democracy as an institutional method that allows the selection of leaders through the fight for votes of the people. Several authors and democratic currents had criticized the theory of limited democracy in the Austro-American economist, for example: the participativistas Carole Pateman and Peter Bachrach and deliberativista Jürgen Habermas, but all were inadequate. So I chose undertake this critical study from the Marxist political theory, more precisely the Marxist theory that was contemporary with Joseph Schumpeter, namely the Marxist theory of the beginning of this century. This is also justified by the fact that Schumpeter himself in his work "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy" undertakes a critique of Marxist socialism to build his theory of democracy based on leadership and the exclusion of people from politics. Our method was to analyse the main points of the central text of "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy", namely the text of Part IV - "Socialism and Democracy." We also use as a method historical research-politician who served on Schumpeter to build their own theory. Our hypothesis is that the theory of democratic leadership of Joseph Schumpeter was an attempt to develop a conceptual structure that would allow the continuation of the unstable equilibrium of the bourgeois domination / O presente tem como objetivo o estudo da teoria democrática contemporânea, especificamente, o estudo da teoria elitista da democracia de Joseph Schumpeter. A teoria democrática após e Segunda Guerra Mundial foi influenciada decisivamente pelas concepções de democracia de Joseph Schumpeter. Isto significa dizer que a disciplina de ciência política foi influenciada também, pelas concepções da democracia elitista de Schumpeter. A teoria de Schumpeter sobre a democracia buscou resolver à questão de como limitar a participação e intervenção do homem do povo nas decisões de Estado. Para responder isto Schumpeter recorre a algumas variáveis. Dentre estas destacamos os parâmetros do regime parlamentar inglês e a funcionalidade dos partidos social-democratas. Estas duas variáveis permitiram a Joseph Schumpeter a definir democracia como um método institucional que permite a seleção de lideres através da luta pelos votos do povo. Diversos autores e correntes democráticas haviam criticado a teoria restrita de democracia do economista austro-americano, como por exemplo: os participativistas Carole Pateman e Peter Bachrach e o deliberativista Jürgen Habermas; mas todas se mostraram insuficientes. Por isso escolhemos empreender este estudo crítico a partir da teoria política marxista, mais precisamente da teoria marxista que foi contemporânea a Joseph Schumpeter, ou seja, a teoria marxista do começo do século XX. Isto se justifica também pelo fato de que o próprio Schumpeter em sua obra Capitalismo, Socialismo e Democracia empreende uma crítica ao socialismo marxista para construir sua teoria da democracia baseada na liderança e na exclusão do povo da política. Nosso método consistiu em analisar os pontos principais do texto central de Capitalismo, Socialismo e Democracia , a saber, o texto da Parte IV - Socialismo e Democracia . Também utilizamos como método investigações histórico-político que serviram ao próprio Schumpeter para construir sua teoria. Nossa hipótese é que a teoria da liderança democrática de Joseph Schumpeter era uma tentativa de elaborar uma estrutura conceitual que permitisse a manutenção do equilíbrio instável do regime de dominação burguês

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T14:57:25Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Ronaldo Tadeu de Souza.pdf: 589010 bytes, checksum: c2d6046b6148efe03f72fd16fa7b513f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-11-26 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / This aims at studying the contemporary democratic theory, specifically, the study of theory elitist democracy of Joseph Schumpeter. The democratic theory and after World War II was decisively influenced by the ideas of democracy of Joseph Schumpeter. This means that the discipline of political science was also influenced by the ideas of democracy elitist of Schumpeter. The theory of Schumpeter on democracy sought resolve the question of how to limit the participation and assistance from the man of the people in the decisions of state. To answer this Schumpeter draws on some variables. Among those highlighted the parameters of the English parliamentary system and functionality of the social democrat parties. These two variables allowed Joseph Schumpeter to define democracy as an institutional method that allows the selection of leaders through the fight for votes of the people. Several authors and democratic currents had criticized the theory of limited democracy in the Austro-American economist, for example: the participativistas Carole Pateman and Peter Bachrach and deliberativista Jürgen Habermas, but all were inadequate. So I chose undertake this critical study from the Marxist political theory, more precisely the Marxist theory that was contemporary with Joseph Schumpeter, namely the Marxist theory of the beginning of this century. This is also justified by the fact that Schumpeter himself in his work "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy" undertakes a critique of Marxist socialism to build his theory of democracy based on leadership and the exclusion of people from politics. Our method was to analyse the main points of the central text of "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy", namely the text of Part IV - "Socialism and Democracy." We also use as a method historical research-politician who served on Schumpeter to build their own theory. Our hypothesis is that the theory of democratic leadership of Joseph Schumpeter was an attempt to develop a conceptual structure that would allow the continuation of the unstable equilibrium of the bourgeois domination / O presente tem como objetivo o estudo da teoria democrática contemporânea, especificamente, o estudo da teoria elitista da democracia de Joseph Schumpeter. A teoria democrática após e Segunda Guerra Mundial foi influenciada decisivamente pelas concepções de democracia de Joseph Schumpeter. Isto significa dizer que a disciplina de ciência política foi influenciada também, pelas concepções da democracia elitista de Schumpeter. A teoria de Schumpeter sobre a democracia buscou resolver à questão de como limitar a participação e intervenção do homem do povo nas decisões de Estado. Para responder isto Schumpeter recorre a algumas variáveis. Dentre estas destacamos os parâmetros do regime parlamentar inglês e a funcionalidade dos partidos social-democratas. Estas duas variáveis permitiram a Joseph Schumpeter a definir democracia como um método institucional que permite a seleção de lideres através da luta pelos votos do povo. Diversos autores e correntes democráticas haviam criticado a teoria restrita de democracia do economista austro-americano, como por exemplo: os participativistas Carole Pateman e Peter Bachrach e o deliberativista Jürgen Habermas; mas todas se mostraram insuficientes. Por isso escolhemos empreender este estudo crítico a partir da teoria política marxista, mais precisamente da teoria marxista que foi contemporânea a Joseph Schumpeter, ou seja, a teoria marxista do começo do século XX. Isto se justifica também pelo fato de que o próprio Schumpeter em sua obra Capitalismo, Socialismo e Democracia empreende uma crítica ao socialismo marxista para construir sua teoria da democracia baseada na liderança e na exclusão do povo da política. Nosso método consistiu em analisar os pontos principais do texto central de Capitalismo, Socialismo e Democracia , a saber, o texto da Parte IV - Socialismo e Democracia . Também utilizamos como método investigações histórico-político que serviram ao próprio Schumpeter para construir sua teoria. Nossa hipótese é que a teoria da liderança democrática de Joseph Schumpeter era uma tentativa de elaborar uma estrutura conceitual que permitisse a manutenção do equilíbrio instável do regime de dominação burguês

This is a collection of four papers about the All-Affected Principle (AAP): the view that every person whose morally weighty interests are affected by a democratic decision has the right to participate in that decision. The first paper ('Narrow Possibilism about Democratic Enfranchisement') examines how we should distribute democratic participation rights: a plausible version of AAP must avoid treating unlike cases alike, which would be procedurally unfair. The solution is to distribute participation rights proportionately to the risk that a person's interests will be affected. AAP thus implies an account of political equality that requires adherence to the 'one person-one vote' model only if interests are indeed equally affected. The second paper ('Economic Participation Rights and the AAP') argues that AAP supporters have paid insufficient attention to economic participation rights. The exercise of such rights raises unique worries about democratic accountability, which is why their exercise is constrained by a number of duties. The third paper ('What AAP Is, and How (Not) to Fight It') explores how AAP fares in light of possible objections from desirability and feasibility. Unlike crude versions of AAP, a plausibly restricted version of AAP cannot be dismissed as easily as many AAP sceptics may have thought. My reflections here are useful for AAP supporters and sceptics alike: this paper helps clarify what kind of objection can cast serious doubt on AAP. The fourth paper ('Criminal Disenfranchisement, Political Wrongdoing, and Affected Interests') asks: is AAP compatible with criminal disenfranchisement? AAP, when endorsed in combination with a plausible theory of punishment, is compatible with disenfranchising a narrow set of criminal wrongdoers only: those guilty of 'political wrongdoing', which is wrong primarily because it undermines democratic procedures and institutions for private gain. The upshot is that current blanket policies of criminal disenfranchisement are incompatible with AAP.

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate whether some positions in democratic theory should be adjusted or abandoned in view of internationalisation; and if adjusted, how. More specifically it pursues three different aims: to evaluate various attempts to explain levels of democracy as consequences of internationalisation; to investigate whether the taking into account of internationalisation reveals any reason to reconsider what democracy is or means; and to suggest normative interpretations that cohere with the adjustments of conceptual and explanatory democratic theory made in the course of meeting the other two aims. When empirical methods are used, the scope of the study is restricted to West European parliamentary democracies and their international affairs. More particularly, the focus is on the making of budget policy in Britain, France, and Sweden after the Second World War, and recent budget policy in the European Union. The aspects of democracy empirically analysed are political autonomy, participation, and deliberation. The material considered includes parliamentary debates, official statistics, economic forecasts, elections manifestos, shadow budgets, general election turnouts, regulations of budget decision-making, and staff numbers in government and parliament budgetary divisions. The study reaches the following conclusions among others. (i) The fact that internationalisation increases the divergence between those who make and those who are affected by decisions is not by itself a democratic problem that calls for political reform. (ii) That international organisations may have authorities delegated to them from democratic states is not sufficient to justify them democratically. Democratisation still needs to be undertaken. (iii) The fear that internationalisation dissolves a social trust necessary for political deliberation within nations seems to be unwarranted. If anything, views argued by others in domestic budgetary debate are taken increasingly serious during internationalisation. (iv) The major difficulty with deliberation seems to be its inability to transcend national boundaries. International deliberation at state level has not evolved in response to internationalisation and it is undeveloped in international institutions. (v) Democratic political autonomy diminishes during internationalisation with regard to income redistribution and policy areas taken over by international organisations, but it seems to increase in public spending. (vi) In the area of budget policy-making there are no signs that governments gain power at the expense of parliaments during internationalisation. (vii) To identify crucial democratic issues in a time of internationalisation and to make room for theoretical virtues like general applicability and normative fruitfulness, democracy may be defined as a kind of politics where as many as possible decide as much as possible.

The South African education system has been undergoing a process of transformation and democratisation. An historical overview of democracy in the South Africa education system confirms that the system had developed to become a highly centralised and bureaucratic system during the twentieth century, but it was transformed in 1996 to afford a greater degree of parental participation through local school governing bodies. Democracy is founded on a belief in individual rights, equality, and self-government by the majority of the people. The moral authority of the majority is based on the notion that there is more enlightenment and wisdom between many than in a single man. However, the power of the majority is always limited by the prerequisite of the rule of law and the implicit requirements of legality and justice. This implies that bureaucratic or undemocratic exercise of power by the majority or any person, including the state, would be contrary to the requirements of legality and democracy. An overview of the theories of democracy explains the complexities of the different orientations and ideological approaches to democracy. Critiques of democracy have identified an elitist, inegalitarian, and antiparticipatory core in liberal democracy. The sensible approach to these weaknesses of liberal democracy is to integrate the best features of the various theories of democracy towards a workable solution to manage the systemic conflicts. This includes the formal application of checks and balances and the substantive adjustment of the executive, legislative and judicial practice to maintain a harmonious equilibrium between equality and liberty. The theory of deliberative democracy suggests an additional way to improve substantive democracy. There is an inextricable link between democracy, education and the law. The South African Constitution provides for representative (political) and participatory democracy, as well as for the enshrinement of fundamental rights such as the right to basic education. In addition, the education legislation and policies contain numerous provisions that prescribe and necessitate democratisation of the education system. However, the empirical results of the study show that a number of controversial bureaucratic practices and a tendency towards increased centralisation of the system, constrain democratic school governance. The most prominent undemocratic practices in the system inter alia include: the over-politicisation of schools by the dominant teachers’ union; the bureaucratic appointment of educators; the interference by teachers’ unions with the appointment of educators, the bureaucratic imposition of English medium language policies on Afrikaans schools; and • the ambivalent attitude towards inclusive education. An investigation into the knowledge levels of senior education administrators, school principals and school governing chairpersons, which participated in this study, revealed that their knowledge of participatory democracy and Education Law was superficial. This ignorance of these stakeholders in education compounds the problem of effectively administering, managing and governing schools in a democratic manner. Conclusions drawn from the evidence of this study suggests that certain of the encumbrances to democracy in schools and the system can be attributed to systemic weaknesses, as well as to misconceptions and the misapplication of democratic principles. Finally, the study proposes two models to improve democratic school governance. The first model suggests a theoretical framework for improving the power relations, knowledge, civic attitudes and democratic values. The final model, which is based on the first theoretical model, proposes that Area School Boards be statutorily established to govern defunctive schools and that deliberative forums should be established and implemented within the organisational hierarchy of the education system. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Education))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009

The South African education system has been undergoing a process of transformation and democratisation. An historical overview of democracy in the South Africa education system confirms that the system had developed to become a highly centralised and bureaucratic system during the twentieth century, but it was transformed in 1996 to afford a greater degree of parental participation through local school governing bodies. Democracy is founded on a belief in individual rights, equality, and self-government by the majority of the people. The moral authority of the majority is based on the notion that there is more enlightenment and wisdom between many than in a single man. However, the power of the majority is always limited by the prerequisite of the rule of law and the implicit requirements of legality and justice. This implies that bureaucratic or undemocratic exercise of power by the majority or any person, including the state, would be contrary to the requirements of legality and democracy. An overview of the theories of democracy explains the complexities of the different orientations and ideological approaches to democracy. Critiques of democracy have identified an elitist, inegalitarian, and antiparticipatory core in liberal democracy. The sensible approach to these weaknesses of liberal democracy is to integrate the best features of the various theories of democracy towards a workable solution to manage the systemic conflicts. This includes the formal application of checks and balances and the substantive adjustment of the executive, legislative and judicial practice to maintain a harmonious equilibrium between equality and liberty. The theory of deliberative democracy suggests an additional way to improve substantive democracy. There is an inextricable link between democracy, education and the law. The South African Constitution provides for representative (political) and participatory democracy, as well as for the enshrinement of fundamental rights such as the right to basic education. In addition, the education legislation and policies contain numerous provisions that prescribe and necessitate democratisation of the education system. However, the empirical results of the study show that a number of controversial bureaucratic practices and a tendency towards increased centralisation of the system, constrain democratic school governance. The most prominent undemocratic practices in the system inter alia include: the over-politicisation of schools by the dominant teachers’ union; the bureaucratic appointment of educators; the interference by teachers’ unions with the appointment of educators, the bureaucratic imposition of English medium language policies on Afrikaans schools; and • the ambivalent attitude towards inclusive education. An investigation into the knowledge levels of senior education administrators, school principals and school governing chairpersons, which participated in this study, revealed that their knowledge of participatory democracy and Education Law was superficial. This ignorance of these stakeholders in education compounds the problem of effectively administering, managing and governing schools in a democratic manner. Conclusions drawn from the evidence of this study suggests that certain of the encumbrances to democracy in schools and the system can be attributed to systemic weaknesses, as well as to misconceptions and the misapplication of democratic principles. Finally, the study proposes two models to improve democratic school governance. The first model suggests a theoretical framework for improving the power relations, knowledge, civic attitudes and democratic values. The final model, which is based on the first theoretical model, proposes that Area School Boards be statutorily established to govern defunctive schools and that deliberative forums should be established and implemented within the organisational hierarchy of the education system. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Education))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009

This thesis examines the role of democracy in British, French and American visions of global order in the 1940s. It argues that 'democracy' in a global context did not reflect 'Wilsonian' or 'Cosmopolitan' dreams, nor did it refer to the questions of state representation and institutional accountability that dominate contemporary debates. Instead, it shows that building a 'democratic' global order in the 1940s meant, above all, an attempt to address the challenge of democratic modernity, summarised by Karl Polanyi in 1944 as the search for 'freedom in a complex society', in the new global environment of the mid-century. This challenge was composed of five core concerns, ranging from the protection of the individual from the modern state and the transformation of democratic participation, to the use of expert planning and modern technology to secure economic justice. Achieving a balance between these competing and at times contradictory imperatives was seen as the key to securing a new democratic order that could resist the temptations of nationalism and totalitarianism and secure peace. Crucially, it was only through the structures of a new global order that, internationalists argued, there could be any chance of success. The task was not an easy one, and the historical investigation shows how the choices and trade-offs internationalists made in relation to these imperatives entailed costs in terms of inclusivity, participation and even rights within visions of democratic global order. The thesis has both historical and conceptual goals. First, it recovers important ideas about global order that have been largely written out of the history of this period by taking the language of democracy in world order debates seriously and understanding these visions in context. Conceptually, its aim is to contest and transform how we think about global order and democracy in the history of international thought and in the present day. Instead of Cosmopolitan, Wilsonian, liberal or other normative blueprints for a democratic world order, the conclusion argues that we should, following the example of the 1940s, reconceptualise the relationship between global order and democracy today in relation to the persistent dilemmas of democratic modernity. In a global context, these continue to have interlocking domestic and international dimensions and, more importantly, continue to require choices that entail normatively contestable costs in the construction of a democratic global order. Only then, it argues, will it be possible to think about how these shortcomings can be mitigated and whether and what kind of democratic order we want to pursue at all.