8 - Diagnosing and designing democracy in Europe

Summary

Robert Dahl is famous for the observation that democracy has radically transformed itself – redesigned itself, if you will – over the centuries (Dahl 1996; see also Dahl 1970; 1983; 1989; 2000). The same word, democracy, has prevailed while its rules and practices have changed greatly. In other words – those of de Lampedusa – only by changing has it remained the same. And Dahl does not even hesitate to label these changes as ‘revolutionary’ – even if most of them came about without widespread violence or institutional discontinuity.

Dahl identifies three such revolutions:

The first revolution was one of size. Initially, it was believed that democracy was only suitable for very small polities, such as Greek city states or Swiss cantons. The American constitution redesigned the practice of democracy by making extensive use of territorial representation and introducing federalism – thereby, breaking the size barrier. This set a major precedent in that ‘democratic’ representation became irrevocably tied to competitive elections in spatially defined constituencies at multiple levels of aggregation. Subsequently, this was followed by a juridical decision asserting the supremacy of the most inclusive (‘federal’) level and a political process that privileged stable political organisations (‘parties’) within it.