Stable Democracy?
If we were to make a list of the essential idea of democracies to understand them in a general way, it boils down to three main prepositions. The people, legitimately influenced during an election, choose representatives who promise certain policies, and afterwards the people legitimately influence the elected official. There is universal suffrage in the election, and approximate equality in both the influencing of the people during the election and their subsequent influencing of those elected representatives. The society's actual policies are chosen by the representatives in accord with their promises, and the policies do take effect. (Honderich) To briefly summarize these thoughts one would have to say that democracies incorporate the idea of legitimacy based on popular determination, elected governments, accountability, limited government, and guaranteed civil rights and freedoms. Some theorists hypothesize that a stable, effective democracy requires a relatively homogeneous population. A homogeneous population is a society that shares common beliefs, ancestry, background, religion, economic interests, and similar political outlooks. The more things people have in common in society, the more likely they are to su
stain democratic institutions and make effective governmental decisions. Democracy rests on cooperation, thus the more a group of people have in common the more likely they are to work together to form a stable democracy. Social diversity in democracy can be expected to cause collapse or inefficiencies of that society. So, for a democracy to be effective and stable, the society's population would have to be homogenous. We will call this hypothesis the "homogeneity hypothesis." We will let the dependent variable be an unstable and ineffective democracy. The independent variable is the heterogeneous population. The question to be asked is does a heterogeneous population lead to an unstable and ineffective democracy? This is a nomothetic causal explanation; it means that we believe that variation in the independent variable will be followed by variation in the dependent variable. (Schutt) The empirical association between our independent and dependent variable is the first criterion for identifying a nomothetic causal effect. There seems to be an observed association between heterogeneous populations and unstable ineffective democracies. One would think that differences among the people would cause differences and arguments between those people in a society. The hypothesis suggests that heterogeneous societies are essentially doomed to fail in their attempts to build and maintain a stable and effective democracy. One way to test this is to look at countries with rather heterogeneous populations and look at how viable and effective the country is. One such democratic society is th
Some common words found in the essay are:
, Nevertheless Netherlands, Catholics Protestants, Protestant Socialist, Netherlands Netherlands, Arend Lijphart, Lijphart Dutch, independent dependent, heterogeneous population, dependent variables, variation independent, independent dependent variables, unstable ineffective, dependent variable, Dutch Political, non-experimental longitudinal design, nomothetic causal, heterogeneous populations, people establish governments, non-experimental longitudinal, dutch society, unstable ineffective democracy, stable effective democracy,
Approximate Word count = 1081
Approximate Pages = 4 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
