Understand Politics
Page 4
Outline the main features of a liberal democratic political system with which you are familiar.
How do these features differ from the key characteristics of totalitarian political systems?
Electoral procedures and liberal democracies
* * *
Insight
Elections are an essential aspect of the liberal democratic political process. However, they require the existence of a range of procedures to ensure that they are fairly conducted and that the result genuinely reflects popular opinion.
* * *
Citizens in liberal democracies enjoy a wide range of civil and political liberties. These include entitlements such as the freedoms of expression, movement and association and the existence of an impartial judicial system and freedom from arbitrary arrest. Of particular importance, however, are the procedures that determine how we choose our representatives.
Liberal democracies require mechanisms whereby the general public can exercise choice over who will represent them and also dismiss such persons if they feel that policies lacking popular support are being pursued. This suggests that elections are essential to the operations of liberal democratic political systems. However, elections are not confined to liberal democracies. Countries with alternative political systems may also utilize them. An essential characteristic, therefore, of elections in liberal democracies is that these contests should provide a genuine opportunity to exert popular choice over the personnel and policies of government. Below we consider some of the mechanisms to ensure that the outcome of elections represents public opinion.
FREEDOM OF POLITICAL EXPRESSION
Elections will only provide the public with meaningful political choice if a diverse range of opinions can be articulated. Measures which impose censorship on the media or which place restrictions or bans on political parties, trade unions or other forms of political activity must be pursued extremely cautiously by liberal democratic governments. The freedoms of speech, thought and action are essential features of liberal democracies, distinguishing them from more totalitarian systems in which the ability to dissent is limited.
* * *
The timing of elections
Elections facilitate popular control over the activities of government only if they are held regularly and if their timing is not totally determined by the incumbent office holders. In some countries, legislators or executives hold office for a fixed period of time at the end of which fresh elections must be held. In America, for example, the president is elected for a four-year term while members of the House of Representatives and the Senate serve for two and six years respectively. Other countries do not hold elections at predetermined intervals. In the United Kingdom, for example, the executive has the ability to determine when general elections are held subject to the proviso that fresh elections to the House of Commons must take place at least every five years.
* * *
Nonetheless, a line needs to be drawn between what is acceptable political behaviour and what the state is justified in wishing to prohibit. This affects issues such as what political parties are allowed to say and the means they use to put their case across to the electorate. We refer to this as political toleration.
One justification for imposing restrictions on political toleration is where a party fails to support the basic principles underlying liberal democracy: thus it might achieve power through the ballot box but once installed in power will transform a country’s political system into a totalitarian one. The 1947 Italian Constitution banned the re-formation of the Fascist Party on these grounds while the 1958 French Constitution stipulated that political parties must respect the principles of national sovereignty and democracy. A similar provision applies in the 1949 German Constitution.
The doctrines put forward by a political party may, further, be viewed as threatening not merely to a country’s political system but to the very existence of the state itself and justify limits on political activity. Fear of the Soviet Union and communism (which was believed to be embarking upon a quest for world domination) was prominent in America during the 1950s. The American Communist Party was banned by the 1954 Communist Control Act and perceived sympathy for communism led to discriminatory actions against individuals, such as dismissal from employment.
The methods used by political organizations may also justify curbs being placed on political toleration. Organizations whose views, opinions or statements offend other citizens (and may possibly provoke violence against them) may be subject to restrictions in order to maintain public order. Groups which actually carry out acts of violence to further their political objectives are also likely to be the subject of state constraints. In the United Kingdom, for example, groups which utilize violence to further their political ends are banned (or ‘proscribed’) by the 2000 Terrorism Act.
A WIDE ELECTORATE
The exercise of popular control over government necessitates a broad electorate in which the vast majority of the population possess the right to vote. We refer to this as the franchise. In the nineteenth century the franchise in many countries was based on property ownership: those who owned little or no property were not regarded as citizens and thus were unable to play any part in conventional political activities. The enfranchisement of adults, regardless of wealth, gender or race, is necessary to ensure that governments accurately reflect the wishes of their populations and progress towards universal adult suffrage is a major measurement by which progress towards establishing liberal democracy can be judged.
THE CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS
Public involvement in political activities occurs only when elections are conducted fairly. Factors which include the secret ballot and freedom from intimidation are required to ensure that the outcome of election contests reflects genuine public sentiments. Liberal democracy also requires incumbent office holders to accept the verdict delivered by the electorate and not to oppose it by methods which have sometimes been utilized by non-democratic systems of government. These include setting election results aside by declaring them null and void or supporting a military takeover to preserve the political status quo when an election has demonstrated popular support for fundamental change.
* * *
Eligibility to be a candidate for national office
There are a wide variety of regulations in liberal democracies governing eligibility to stand as a candidate for national office. In the United Kingdom these rules are very broad. Any citizen over the age of 18 (subject to disqualifications laid down in legislation enacted in 1975) may seek election to parliament. A candidate merely requires endorsement from ten registered voters in the constituency he or she wishes to contest and a deposit of £500 (which is returned if the candidate secures over 5 per cent of the votes cast in the election). In other countries the rules are more complex. Candidates may be required to be nominees of political parties, which in turn may be subject to controls governing their ability to contest elections. These may require a party to demonstrate a stipulated level of support in order to be entered on the ballot paper. In Germany, candidates must be nominated by a party with at least five representatives in the Bundestag or a state parliament or (in the case of a new party) have given formal notice to the Federal Election Committee of their intention to contest the election. Additionally, candidates must be nominated by 200 persons who are eligible to vote.
* * *
Question
With reference to any political system with which you are familiar, indicate what features of its operations justify its being described as ‘democratic’.
Legislators and public opinion
* * *
Insight
Those elected to legislatures in a liberal democratic political system should represent public opinion. There are number of dimensions involved in achieving this ideal.
* * *
We have argued that liberal democracy involves a small group of people taking political decisions on behalf of the entire population. This typically takes the form of w
hat we term ‘territorial representation’, whereby legislators represent a specific geographic area and those who live there. There is, however, an alternative form of representation termed ‘functional representation’. This entails legislators representing specific sectional or vocational interests rather than being directly elected by the general public. The Irish Seanad is partly constituted on this basis.
In the sections that follow we focus on legislatures and consider whether those elected to them (legislators) adequately reflect public opinion.
THE PARTY SYSTEM
Parties may enhance public involvement in policy making, although the extent to which they achieve this is dependent on factors such as the size of their membership. Further, the development of party systems may distort the relationship between an elected official and his or her electorate. Voters may support candidates for public office on the basis of their party label rather than their perceived ability to put forward the needs of local electors. While in office, party discipline may force legislators to sacrifice locality to party if these interests do not coincide. The extent to which this happens depends on the strength of party discipline, which is stronger in some liberal democracies such as the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand than in others such as America, where local influences (termed ‘parochialism’) play a significant part in determining a voter’s choice of candidate for public office.
THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM
Electoral systems vary in the extent to which those who are elected to legislatures accurately reflect the voting preferences of members of the general public. A fundamental division exists between the first-past-the-post electoral system and proportional representation. In the United Kingdom, for example, the former has been charged with distorting the wishes of the electorate and producing a legislative body which does not accord with popular opinion as expressed at a general election.
THE STATUS OF LEGISLATORS
Those who are elected to legislatures may fulfil the role of either a delegate or a representative. A delegate is an elected official who follows the instructions of the electorate as and when these are given. A delegate has little freedom of action and is effectively mandated by voters to act in a particular manner. A representative claims the right to exercise his or her judgement on matters which arise. Once elected to office a representative’s actions are determined by that person’s conscience and not by instructions delivered by voters. A representative can, however, be held accountable by the public at the next election for actions undertaken while occupying public office.
* * *
The status of UK members of parliament
The eighteenth-century statesman, Edmund Burke, argued that an MP should apply his judgement to serve the interests of the nation as a whole rather than having to obey the wishes of a local electorate.
A member of parliament is subject to no formal restraints on his or her actions once elected. The system of recall which is practised in some American states has never applied in the United Kingdom. A member of parliament cannot be forced to resign by local electors: their only power is their ultimate ability to select an alternative representative when the next election occurs.
There are informal pressures which may influence the behaviour of United Kingdom members of parliament, for example the discipline exerted by the party system. But even this may prove an ineffective restraint on their behaviour.
* * *
THE SOCIAL COMPOSITION OF LEGISLATORS
The term ‘characteristic representation’ suggests that the institutions of representative government can only validly represent public opinion when they constitute a microcosm of society, containing members from diverse social groups in proportion to their strength. However, in many liberal democracies key divisions in society (such as its occupational makeup or its class, ethnic or religious divisions) are not reflected in this manner. Many liberal democracies were slow in according women the right to vote. New Zealand granted this in 1893 and the United Kingdom (on a restricted basis) in 1918. However, white, male, middle-class persons of above average education continue to dominate the composition of legislatures, which are thus socially unrepresentative although possibly reflective of the characteristics required to achieve success in all aspects of social activity.
The lack of social representativeness may result in the institutions of government becoming out of tune with public opinion and being seen as anachronistic defenders of the status quo when the national mood demands reform and innovation. This problem may be accentuated by the procedures adopted by legislative bodies: the seniority system used by the American Congress tended to entrench the conservative influence over post-war American domestic affairs and persisted until changes to these procedures were introduced during the 1960s and 1970s. Groups who perceive that their needs are being inadequately catered for by the institutions of government (such as women, youth or racial minorities) may resort to alternative means of political expression which may have long-term consequences for the authority of such bodies.
THE COMPOSITION OF THE LEGISLATURES IN AMERICA AND THE UK
In America, Congress is composed of 100 senators and 435 members of the House of Representatives. In January 2009 there were 78 women, 42 African–Caribbean members, 25 Hispanic members, five Asian members and one native American serving in the 110th Congress (whose life span is 2008–10). The composition of the Senate included 18 women, one African-Caribbean, two Hispanic and two Asian members. Representatives from minority ethnic backgrounds are organized into caucuses – the Congressional Black Caucus (formed in 1970), the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (set up in 1976) and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (established in 1994).
* * *
Composition of the UK parliament
At the 2010 UK general election 650 members of parliament were elected. Of these, 143 (22 per cent) were women and 27 (4.2 per cent) were from minority ethnic communities. The remaining 480 (73.8 per cent) were white males. If the House of Commons were socially representative, around half of its members would be women and 7.9 per cent (or 51 MPs) would be drawn from minority ethnic communities. The 2002 Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act (which enables political parties to use positive discrimination to select election candidates if they wish to do so) has served to slightly increase the number of women MPs, although in 2010, 262 constituencies had no female candidates.
* * *
Questions
With reference to any national legislature or local government body with which you are familiar, indicate the level of representation secured by women and minority ethnic groups.
In your view is it important that elected bodies of this nature should mirror the social composition of society?
Public involvement in policy making
* * *
Insight
The public may seek to influence policy making through ways other than voting. Alternative mechanisms include demonstrations, civil disobedience and direct action. In the UK, these are termed ‘extra-parliamentary political activities’ as they take place outside of the arena of parliament.
* * *
We have seen that elections play a major role in liberal democratic political systems. However, the ability to elect representatives and (at a subsequent election) to deliver a verdict on their performance in public office does not give the general public a significant role in political affairs. In many liberal democracies, therefore, other mechanisms exist which seek to provide citizens with a more constant role in policy making. In this section we consider some of the ways in which this objective can be achieved.
PRESSURE GROUPS
Pressure groups provide the public with opportunities to influence the policy-making process. The existence of pressure groups and the competition which occurs between them is viewed as an indispensable aspect of a pluralist society in which power is dispersed and policy emerges as the result of a process of bargaining and conciliation conducted between groups.
&nb
sp; EXTRA-PARLIAMENTARY POLITICAL ACTION
What we term ‘conventional political activity’ entails viewing a country’s legislative assembly as the main arena in which political decisions are formally made. Alternatively, extra-parliamentary political activity involves actions undertaken by groups of citizens who seek to influence a state’s decision-making process through ways other than this. To do this they may utilize a wide range of methods associated with protest which include demonstrations, industrial disputes, civil disobedience, direct action, riots and terrorism. Extra-parliamentary methods (which may be associated with organizations such as pressure groups and social movements) offer an alternative means of political action to that provided by conventional political activity.
The ability to engage in extra-parliamentary political activity is an important feature of all liberal democratic political systems and it possesses a number of advantages to aid their operations. These include enabling citizens to involve themselves in the government of their country beyond periodic voting in elections and permitting them to exert influence over specific items of policy which are of concern to them, thereby forcing governments to listen to popular concerns. An important example of this occurred in France in 2006, when national protests involving students and trade unions forced the president to intervene and announce considerable changes to the Youth Employment Law that, as originally put forward, would have made it easier for employers to dismiss any worker aged below 26 years of age. Extra-parliamentary politics may succeed in raising minority interests: the emergence of women’s issues and environmental concerns onto the political agenda owed much to the activities of groups willing to utilize extra-parliamentary methods. Extra-parliamentary politics also guard against political apathy resulting from a tendency to defer all political decisions to a country’s leaders, which could result in a totalitarian system of government.