Suchergebnisse

Mainstream liberal democratic theory has primarily emphasized competition as they driving force that ensures the viability of democratic governance. As political parties and candidates compete for electoral majorities, it is believed that the best leaders and the best policy proposals will eventually prevail (Downs, 1957; Schumpeter, 1954). However, conflict and competition may turn into a destructive force that threatens the collective foundation on which democracy depends. In order to distinguish themselves from their political competitors, political parties tend to emphasize differences and underplay areas of collaboration (Bogdanor & Butler, 1983). Driven by a commercialized and conflict-hungry media, politics, especially during election time, has turned into a battlefield that leaves little space for public deliberation (Swanson & Mancini, 1996). Indeed, attacks, insults, and mudslinging have become marked features of elections campaigns in the United Kingdom and the United States where "winner-takes-all" electoral systems further contribute to a generally antagonistic political climate (Ansolabehere & Iyengar, 1995; King, 2006). The emphasis on competition might also affect the way in which ordinary citizens understand the democratic process. In a political environment where politics is about winning -- elections, poll rating, arguments -- a political opponent might be regarded as an enemy rather than a fellow citizen, and the arguments of the other side might be dismissed without serious consideration. Such an orientation "might jeopardize the willingness to accept opposition, and could cause electoral decisions to be rejected or dispensed with altogether" (Almond & Verba, 1963, p. 85). Adapted from the source document.