Suchergebnisse

PROFESSOR JUAN LINZ MAKES THE CLAIM THAT PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEMS ARE MORE CONDUCIVE TO STABLE DEMOCRACY THAN ARE PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEMS, THIS ARTICLE ARGUES THAT LINZ'S CLAIMS ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE. IT EXPLORES PRESIDENTIALISM AND POLITICAL INSTABILITY, MODES OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, INSUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCES, AND CHOOSING AMONG DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS. IT CONCLUDES THAT LINZ'S THESIS BOILS DOWN TO AN ARGUMENT NOT AGAINST THE PRESIDENCY BUT AGAINST PLURALITY ELECTION, NOT IN FAVOR OF PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEMS BUT IN FAVOR OF PARLIAMENTARY COALITIONS.

The notion that democracy is a system is ever present in democratic theory. However, what it means to think systemically about democracy (as opposed to what it means for a political system to be democratic) is under-elaborated. This article sets out a meta-level framework for thinking systemically about democracy, built upon seven conceptual building blocks, which we term (1) functions, (2) norms, (3) practices, (4) actors, (5) arenas, (6) levels, and (7) interactions. This enables us to systematically structure the debate on democratic systems, highlighting the commonalities and differences between systems approaches, their omissions, and the key questions that remain to be answered. It also enables us to push the debate forward both by demonstrating how a full consideration of all seven building blocks would address issues with existing approaches and by introducing new conceptual clarifications within those building blocks.

Elections are a procedure typical for democratic systems, but also systems which do not respect the principles of democracy often employ them. However, due to their different functional positioning, they fulfill various functions. The presented text is an attempt to present the most important functions performed by the elections in democratic systems. The adopted model of generalization has allowed for separation of seven basic functions, present in all elections: delegation of political representation; selection of the political elite; legitimisation of those in power; control over authorities; political accountability; creation of political programmes; recreation of public opinion image. The presented typology allows for its use both in different types of elections (parliamentary, presidential, local, regional and European Parliament) as well as in relation to different electoral systems. The general nature of the described types of functions allows the separation of specific categories within its framework, but the objective of the present study has determined that the focus remains on the description and analysis of the presented types.

This text provides an introduction to the study of comparative politics. Rich in case study material and global in coverage, it sets out the basic theoretical and methodological foundations for studying different political systems as well as the key structures and actors of which they are comprised.

Shows how governments are biased in favor of violent, adventurous foreign policy projects when the voters' evaluation of foreign policy outcomes could have an effect on election results.

This text provides an introduction to the study of comparative politics. Rich in case study material and global in coverage, it sets out the basic theoretical and methodological foundations for studying different political systems as well as the key structures and actors of which they are comprised.

The following essay begins by outlining the pragmatist link between truth claims and democratic deliberations. To this end, special attention will be paid to Jeffrey Stout&rsquo ; s pragmatist enfranchisement of religious citizens. Stout defends a deliberative notion of democracy that fulfills stringent criteria of inclusion and security against domination. While mitigating secular exclusivity, Stout nonetheless acknowledges the new visibility of religion in populist attempts to dominate political life through mass rule and charismatic authorities. In response, I evaluate recent innovations in deliberative democratic systems theory (DDST). By adding a pragmatist inflection to DDST, I aim to apprehend the complex religious interactions between partisan interest groups as well as the trust-building capacities of minipublics.