Jeremy Jennings
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198203131
- eISBN:
- 9780191728587
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198203131.003.0003
- Subject:
- History, European Modern History, Political History
This chapter begins with a discussion of theories of representation in pre-revolutionary France. It shows how the absolute monarchy figured as a mechanism designed to enhance, rather than diminish, ...
More
This chapter begins with a discussion of theories of representation in pre-revolutionary France. It shows how the absolute monarchy figured as a mechanism designed to enhance, rather than diminish, the security and liberty of the individual. It further shows how demands for constitutional reform were at the heart of popular demands in 1789. At first this envisaged only a reformed monarchy, often following English constitutional practice. Quickly a new theory of representation emerged focused upon the supremacy of the legislative assembly and the direct expression of the will of the people: the Republic. The remainder of this chapter examines the continuing constitutional debate through the nineteenth century, especially with regard to the constitutions of the Second and Third Republics. It ends with a reflection on the personalization of presidential power in the Third Republic.Less
This chapter begins with a discussion of theories of representation in pre-revolutionary France. It shows how the absolute monarchy figured as a mechanism designed to enhance, rather than diminish, the security and liberty of the individual. It further shows how demands for constitutional reform were at the heart of popular demands in 1789. At first this envisaged only a reformed monarchy, often following English constitutional practice. Quickly a new theory of representation emerged focused upon the supremacy of the legislative assembly and the direct expression of the will of the people: the Republic. The remainder of this chapter examines the continuing constitutional debate through the nineteenth century, especially with regard to the constitutions of the Second and Third Republics. It ends with a reflection on the personalization of presidential power in the Third Republic.
Laurence Claus
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199735099
- eISBN:
- 9780199950478
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199735099.003.0008
- Subject:
- Law, Philosophy of Law, Legal Profession and Ethics
Law's purely predictive character is starkly exposed in revolutionary moments, when people in community together stop paying attention to existing law and government. When words cease describing life ...
More
Law's purely predictive character is starkly exposed in revolutionary moments, when people in community together stop paying attention to existing law and government. When words cease describing life in the group accurately, those words cease to be law. “Sovereignty of the people” is a truism or an oxymoron—a truism if it just acknowledges that leadership depends on others' choice to follow, an oxymoron if it translates as leadership of the followers. Power sharing is the path to confidence that our community's moral understandings will make their way into our law and government. Power sharing can help homogenize the degree of predictive effectiveness that lawgivers enjoy, reducing the risk that any one among them will subvert the system. Democratic selection may help morally justify lawgiving, but does not imply that lawgivers ever have a preemptive moral right to be obeyed. Once we see that law and government are not about obeying lawgivers, consent theories of authority lose their point. But that does not diminish the enthusiasm we deserve to have for ways of choosing lawgivers that involve our widespread agreement. The systemic nature of law fulfills our need to trace the legal pedigree of words back to custom—the significance of ultimate constitutive documents clearly comes from custom and nothing else. Central and marginal instances of legal systems correspond to central and marginal instances of human community—we are less community the less we understand each other.Less
Law's purely predictive character is starkly exposed in revolutionary moments, when people in community together stop paying attention to existing law and government. When words cease describing life in the group accurately, those words cease to be law. “Sovereignty of the people” is a truism or an oxymoron—a truism if it just acknowledges that leadership depends on others' choice to follow, an oxymoron if it translates as leadership of the followers. Power sharing is the path to confidence that our community's moral understandings will make their way into our law and government. Power sharing can help homogenize the degree of predictive effectiveness that lawgivers enjoy, reducing the risk that any one among them will subvert the system. Democratic selection may help morally justify lawgiving, but does not imply that lawgivers ever have a preemptive moral right to be obeyed. Once we see that law and government are not about obeying lawgivers, consent theories of authority lose their point. But that does not diminish the enthusiasm we deserve to have for ways of choosing lawgivers that involve our widespread agreement. The systemic nature of law fulfills our need to trace the legal pedigree of words back to custom—the significance of ultimate constitutive documents clearly comes from custom and nothing else. Central and marginal instances of legal systems correspond to central and marginal instances of human community—we are less community the less we understand each other.
David M. Primo and Jeffrey D. Milyo
- Published in print:
- 2020
- Published Online:
- May 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780226712802
- eISBN:
- 9780226713137
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226713137.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
In this chapter, Primo and Milyo offer a theoretical foundation for why and how public perceptions of American democracy are thought to be tied to the role of money in the political system. They cast ...
More
In this chapter, Primo and Milyo offer a theoretical foundation for why and how public perceptions of American democracy are thought to be tied to the role of money in the political system. They cast doubt on these microfoundations, showing that a hydraulic theory of influence implies that attempts to limit access and influence by restricting campaign contributions will lead to a reorientation of efforts by affected interests—not capitulation. Moreover, because research in social choice theory establishes there is no such thing as the “will of the people,” the notion that money in politics “distorts” outcomes—a central claim of campaign finance reformers—has little meaning in the absence of some normative standard, which itself will be the subject of dispute.Less
In this chapter, Primo and Milyo offer a theoretical foundation for why and how public perceptions of American democracy are thought to be tied to the role of money in the political system. They cast doubt on these microfoundations, showing that a hydraulic theory of influence implies that attempts to limit access and influence by restricting campaign contributions will lead to a reorientation of efforts by affected interests—not capitulation. Moreover, because research in social choice theory establishes there is no such thing as the “will of the people,” the notion that money in politics “distorts” outcomes—a central claim of campaign finance reformers—has little meaning in the absence of some normative standard, which itself will be the subject of dispute.
Jeffrey Goldsworthy
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199248087
- eISBN:
- 9780191705199
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199248087.003.0008
- Subject:
- Law, Constitutional and Administrative Law
This chapter discusses how the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty had come to be taken for granted by British lawyers and political theorists in the early 19th century. The principal justification ...
More
This chapter discusses how the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty had come to be taken for granted by British lawyers and political theorists in the early 19th century. The principal justification for the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty was Parliament's democratic function of expressing the will of the people. But other justifications, also perpetuating older themes, were advanced.Less
This chapter discusses how the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty had come to be taken for granted by British lawyers and political theorists in the early 19th century. The principal justification for the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty was Parliament's democratic function of expressing the will of the people. But other justifications, also perpetuating older themes, were advanced.
Kristoffer Ahlstrom-Vij and Jennifer R. Steele
- Published in print:
- 2021
- Published Online:
- June 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780192893338
- eISBN:
- 9780191914607
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780192893338.003.0011
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Political Philosophy, Metaphysics/Epistemology
It is well established that the general population tend to lack in-depth knowledge about key political and policy matters. What are the implications for policymaking? This chapter considers this ...
More
It is well established that the general population tend to lack in-depth knowledge about key political and policy matters. What are the implications for policymaking? This chapter considers this question in the context of immigration policy, reporting first on a focus group study which offers evidence that reported desires for a reduced number of immigrants might ultimately reflect a desire for immigrants of (perceived) high quality, not a reduction in overall quantity, where quality is defined in terms of fiscal impact. The chapter then argues that public preferences for such “good immigrants” are problematic, deploying a number of counterfactual models that suggest that such preferences are based on mistaken beliefs, and arguing that they thereby likely fail to reflect what the person truly desires. These findings extend beyond immigration policy and serve to highlight the often-overlooked problem that policies implemented with reference to popular sentiments might not capture “the will of the people.”Less
It is well established that the general population tend to lack in-depth knowledge about key political and policy matters. What are the implications for policymaking? This chapter considers this question in the context of immigration policy, reporting first on a focus group study which offers evidence that reported desires for a reduced number of immigrants might ultimately reflect a desire for immigrants of (perceived) high quality, not a reduction in overall quantity, where quality is defined in terms of fiscal impact. The chapter then argues that public preferences for such “good immigrants” are problematic, deploying a number of counterfactual models that suggest that such preferences are based on mistaken beliefs, and arguing that they thereby likely fail to reflect what the person truly desires. These findings extend beyond immigration policy and serve to highlight the often-overlooked problem that policies implemented with reference to popular sentiments might not capture “the will of the people.”
James S. Fishkin
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- June 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780198820291
- eISBN:
- 9780191860188
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198820291.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
Democracy requires some connection to the “will of the people.” But there are impediments to how that will is formed and how it is connected to public decisions. Efforts to manipulate public opinion, ...
More
Democracy requires some connection to the “will of the people.” But there are impediments to how that will is formed and how it is connected to public decisions. Efforts to manipulate public opinion, the competitive pressures of campaigns, discussions among the like-minded on social media, distortions of campaign finance all make it difficult for a mostly inattentive mass public to come to considered judgments. “Deliberative democracy” offers a useful method of supplementing our current political practices. There is a need for research and experimentation into entry points for a thoughtful and representative public voice. Such efforts provide a solution to a recurring dilemma—do we listen to the people and get the angry voices of populism or rely on widely distrusted elites and get policies that seem out of touch with the public’s concerns. Populism or technocracy? Deliberative democracy can provide a thoughtful and representative public voice.Less
Democracy requires some connection to the “will of the people.” But there are impediments to how that will is formed and how it is connected to public decisions. Efforts to manipulate public opinion, the competitive pressures of campaigns, discussions among the like-minded on social media, distortions of campaign finance all make it difficult for a mostly inattentive mass public to come to considered judgments. “Deliberative democracy” offers a useful method of supplementing our current political practices. There is a need for research and experimentation into entry points for a thoughtful and representative public voice. Such efforts provide a solution to a recurring dilemma—do we listen to the people and get the angry voices of populism or rely on widely distrusted elites and get policies that seem out of touch with the public’s concerns. Populism or technocracy? Deliberative democracy can provide a thoughtful and representative public voice.
James S. Fishkin
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- June 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780198820291
- eISBN:
- 9780191860188
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198820291.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
Democracy requires a connection to the “will of the people.” What does that mean in a world of “fake news,” relentless advocacy, dialogue mostly among the like-minded, and massive spending to ...
More
Democracy requires a connection to the “will of the people.” What does that mean in a world of “fake news,” relentless advocacy, dialogue mostly among the like-minded, and massive spending to manipulate public opinion? What kind of opinion can the public have under such conditions? What would democracy be like if the people were really thinking in depth about the policies they must live with? This book argues that “deliberative democracy” is not utopian. It is a practical solution to many of democracy’s ills. It can supplement existing institutions with practical reforms. It can apply at all levels of government and for many different kinds of policy choices. This book speaks to a recurring dilemma: listen to the people and get the angry voices of populism or rely on widely distrusted elites and get policies that seem out of touch with the public’s concerns. Instead, there are methods for getting a representative and thoughtful public voice that is really worth listening to. Democracy is under siege in most countries. Democratic institutions have low approval and face a resurgent threat from authoritarian regimes. Deliberative democracy can provide an antidote. It can reinvigorate our democratic politics. This book draws on the author’s research with many collaborators on “Deliberative Polling”—a process he has conducted in twenty-seven countries on six continents. It contributes both to political theory and to the empirical study of public opinion and participation, and should interest anyone concerned about the future of democracy and how it can be revitalized.Less
Democracy requires a connection to the “will of the people.” What does that mean in a world of “fake news,” relentless advocacy, dialogue mostly among the like-minded, and massive spending to manipulate public opinion? What kind of opinion can the public have under such conditions? What would democracy be like if the people were really thinking in depth about the policies they must live with? This book argues that “deliberative democracy” is not utopian. It is a practical solution to many of democracy’s ills. It can supplement existing institutions with practical reforms. It can apply at all levels of government and for many different kinds of policy choices. This book speaks to a recurring dilemma: listen to the people and get the angry voices of populism or rely on widely distrusted elites and get policies that seem out of touch with the public’s concerns. Instead, there are methods for getting a representative and thoughtful public voice that is really worth listening to. Democracy is under siege in most countries. Democratic institutions have low approval and face a resurgent threat from authoritarian regimes. Deliberative democracy can provide an antidote. It can reinvigorate our democratic politics. This book draws on the author’s research with many collaborators on “Deliberative Polling”—a process he has conducted in twenty-seven countries on six continents. It contributes both to political theory and to the empirical study of public opinion and participation, and should interest anyone concerned about the future of democracy and how it can be revitalized.