Direct democracy or pure democracy is a form
of democracy in which people decide on policy
initiatives directly. This differs from the
majority of most currently established democracies,
which are representative democracies.
== Overview ==
In a representative democracy, people vote
for representatives who then enact policy
initiatives. In direct democracy, people decide
on policies without any intermediary. Depending
on the particular system in use, direct democracy
might entail passing executive decisions,
the use of sortition, making laws, directly
electing or dismissing officials, and conducting
trials. Two leading forms of direct democracy
are participatory democracy and deliberative
democracy.
Semi-direct democracies in which representatives
administer day-to-day governance, but the
citizens remain the sovereign, allow for three
forms of popular action: referendum (plebiscite),
initiative, and recall. The first two forms—referendums
and initiatives—are examples of direct legislation.A
'compulsory referendum' subjects the legislation
drafted by political elites to a binding popular
vote. This is the most common form of direct
legislation. A 'popular referendum' empowers
citizens to make a petition that calls existing
legislation to a vote by the citizens. Institutions
specify the timeframe for a valid petition
and the number of signatures required, and
may require signatures from diverse communities
to protect minority interests. This form of
direct democracy effectively grants the voting
public a veto on laws adopted by the elected
legislature, as is done in Switzerland.A 'citizen-initiated
referendum' (also called an initiative) empowers
members of the general public to propose,
by petition, specific statutory measures or
constitutional reforms to the government and,
as with referendums, the vote may be binding
or simply advisory. Initiatives may be direct
or indirect: With the direct initiative, a
successful proposition is placed directly
on the ballot to be subject to vote (as exemplified
by California's system). With an indirect
initiative, a successful proposition is first
presented to the legislature for their consideration;
however, if no acceptable action is taken
after a designated period of time, the proposition
moves to direct popular vote. Such a form
of indirect initiative is utilized by Switzerland
for constitutional amendments.A deliberative
referendum is a referendum that increases
public deliberation through purposeful institutional
design.
Power of recall gives the public the power
to remove elected officials from office before
the end of their term.
== History ==
The earliest known direct democracy is said
to be the Athenian democracy in the 5th century
BC, although it was not an inclusive democracy:
women, foreigners, and slaves were excluded
from it. The main bodies in the Athenian democracy
were the assembly, composed of male citizens;
the boulê, composed of 500 citizens; and
the law courts, composed of a massive number
of jurors chosen by lot, with no judges. There
were only about 30,000 male citizens, but
several thousand of them were politically
active in each year, and many of them quite
regularly for years on end. The Athenian democracy
was direct not only in the sense that decisions
were made by the assembled people, but also
in the sense that the people through the assembly,
boulê, and law courts controlled the entire
political process, and a large proportion
of citizens were involved constantly in the
public business. Modern democracies, being
representative, not direct, do not resemble
the Athenian system.
Also relevant to the history of direct democracy
is the history of Ancient Rome, specifically
the Roman Republic, beginning around 509 BC.
Rome displayed many aspects of democracy,
both direct and indirect, from the era of
Roman monarchy all the way to the collapse
of the Roman Empire. Indeed, the Senate, formed
in the first days of the city, lasted through
the Kingdom, Republic, and Empire, and even
continued after the decline of Western Rome;
and its structure and regulations continue
to influence legislative bodies worldwide.
As to direct democracy, the ancient Roman
Republic had a system of citizen lawmaking,
or citizen formulation and passage of law,
and a citizen veto of legislature-made law.
Many historians mark the end of the Republic
with the passage of a law named the Lex Titia,
27 November 43 BC, which eliminated many oversight
provisions.Modern-era citizen lawmaking began
in the towns of Switzerland in the 13th century.
In 1847, the Swiss added the "statute referendum"
to their national constitution. They soon
discovered that merely having the power to
veto Parliament's laws was not enough. In
1891, they added the "constitutional amendment
initiative". Swiss politics since 1891 have
given the world a valuable experience base
with the national-level constitutional amendment
initiative. In the past 120 years, more than
240 initiatives have been put to referendums.
The populace has been conservative, approving
only about 10% of these initiatives; in addition,
they have often opted for a version of the
initiative rewritten by government. (See Direct
democracy in Switzerland below.)Some of the
issues surrounding the related notion of a
direct democracy using the Internet and other
communications technologies are dealt with
in e-democracy and below under the term electronic
direct democracy. More concisely, the concept
of open source governance applies principles
of the free software movement to the governance
of people, allowing the entire populace to
participate in government directly, as much
or as little as they please.
== Examples ==
=== Early Athens ===
Athenian democracy developed in the Greek
city-state of Athens, comprising the city
of Athens and the surrounding territory of
Attica, around 600 BC. Athens was one of the
very first known democracies. Other Greek
cities set up democracies, and even though
most followed an Athenian model, none were
as powerful, stable, or well-documented as
that of Athens. In the direct democracy of
Athens, the citizens did not nominate representatives
to vote on legislation and executive bills
on their behalf (as in the United States)
but instead voted as individuals. The public
opinion of voters was influenced by the political
satire of the comic poets in the theatres.Solon
(694 BC), Cleisthenes (608–607 BCE), and
Ephialtes (562 BC) all contributed to the
development of Athenian democracy. Historians
differ on which of them was responsible for
which institution, and which of them most
represented a truly democratic movement. It
is most usual to date Athenian democracy from
Cleisthenes, since Solon's constitution fell
and was replaced by the tyranny of Peisistratus,
whereas Ephialtes revised Cleisthenes' constitution
relatively peacefully.
Hipparchus, the brother of the tyrant Hippias,
was killed by Harmodius and Aristogeiton,
who were subsequently honored by the Athenians
for their alleged restoration of Athenian
freedom.
The greatest and longest-lasting democratic
leader was Pericles; after his death, Athenian
democracy was twice briefly interrupted by
oligarchic revolution towards the end of the
Peloponnesian War. It was modified somewhat
after it was restored under Eucleides; the
most detailed accounts are of this 4th-century
modification rather than of the Periclean
system. It was suppressed by the Macedonians
in 322 BC. The Athenian institutions were
later revived, but the extent to which they
were a real democracy is debatable.
=== Switzerland ===
The pure form of direct democracy exists only
in the Swiss cantons of Appenzell Innerrhoden
and Glarus. The Swiss Confederation is a semi-direct
democracy (representative democracy with strong
instruments of direct democracy). The nature
of direct democracy in Switzerland is fundamentally
complemented by its federal governmental structures
(in German also called the Subsidiaritätsprinzip).Most
western countries have representative systems.
Switzerland is a rare example of a country
with instruments of direct democracy (at the
levels of the municipalities, cantons, and
federal state). Citizens have more power than
in a representative democracy. On any political
level citizens can propose changes to the
constitution (popular initiative), or ask
for an optional referendum to be held on any
law voted by the federal, cantonal parliament
and/or municipal legislative body.The list
for mandatory or optional referendums on each
political level are generally much longer
in Switzerland than in any other country;
for example any amendment to the constitution
must automatically be voted on by the Swiss
electorate and cantons, on cantonal/communal
levels often any financial decision of a certain
substantial amount decreed by legislative
and/or executive bodies as well.Swiss citizens
vote regularly on any kind of issue on every
political level, such as financial approvals
of a school house or the building of a new
street, or the change of the policy regarding
sexual work, or on constitutional changes,
or on the foreign policy of Switzerland, four
times a year. Between January 1995 and June
2005, Swiss citizens voted 31 times, on 103
federal questions besides many more cantonal
and municipal questions. During the same period,
French citizens participated in only two referendums.In
Switzerland, simple majorities are sufficient
at the municipal and cantonal level, but at
the federal level double majorities are required
on constitutional issues.A double majority
requires approval by a majority of individuals
voting, and also by a majority of cantons.
Thus, in Switzerland a citizen-proposed amendment
to the federal constitution (i.e. popular
initiative) cannot be passed at the federal
level if a majority of the people approve
but a majority of the cantons disapprove.
For referendums or propositions in general
terms (like the principle of a general revision
of the Constitution), a majority of those
voting is sufficient (Swiss Constitution,
2005).
In 1890, when the provisions for Swiss national
citizen lawmaking were being debated by civil
society and government, the Swiss adopted
the idea of double majorities from the United
States Congress, in which House votes were
to represent the people and Senate votes were
to represent the states. According to its
supporters, this "legitimacy-rich" approach
to national citizen lawmaking has been very
successful. Kris Kobach claims that Switzerland
has had tandem successes both socially and
economically which are matched by only a few
other nations. Kobach states at the end of
his book, "Too often, observers deem Switzerland
an oddity among political systems. It is more
appropriate to regard it as a pioneer." Finally,
the Swiss political system, including its
direct democratic devices in a multi-level
governance context, becomes increasingly interesting
for scholars of European Union integration.
=== Paris Commune ===
In 1871 after the establishment of the Paris
Commune, the Parisians established a decentralized
direct system of government with appointed
organizers to make sense of the largely spontaneous
uprising. While it still refused women the
right to vote, they were heavily involved
in the consensus before votes took place.
Everything from the military to when meetings
took place was democratized, and such decentralization
and aforementioned democratization led many
members of the First Internationale to regard
the Paris Commune as a stateless society.
Due to the short lifespan of the Commune,
only one citywide election was held and the
structures necessary to facilitate future
organized elections on large scales was largely
nonexistent. However, the influence of direct
democratization in the Paris Commune is not
to be understated.
=== United States ===
In the New England region of the United States,
towns in areas such as Vermont decide local
affairs through the direct democratic process
of the town meeting. This is the oldest form
of direct democracy in the United States,
and predates the founding of the country by
at least a century.
Direct democracy was not what the framers
of the United States Constitution envisioned
for the nation. They saw a danger in tyranny
of the majority. As a result, they advocated
a representative democracy in the form of
a constitutional republic over a direct democracy.
For example, James Madison, in Federalist
No. 10, advocates a constitutional republic
over direct democracy precisely to protect
the individual from the will of the majority.
He says,
Those who hold and those who are without property
have ever formed distinct interests in society.
Those who are creditors, and those who are
debtors, fall under a like discrimination.
A landed interest, a manufacturing interest,
a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest,
with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity
in civilized nations, and divide them into
different classes, actuated by different sentiments
and views. The regulation of these various
and interfering interests forms the principal
task of modern legislation, and involves the
spirit of party and faction in the necessary
and ordinary operations of the government.
[...]
[A] pure democracy, by which I mean a society
consisting of a small number of citizens,
who assemble and administer the government
in person, can admit no cure for the mischiefs
of faction. A common passion or interest will
be felt by a majority, and there is nothing
to check the inducements to sacrifice the
weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies
have ever been found incompatible with personal
security or the rights of property; and have,
in general, been as short in their lives as
they have been violent in their deaths.
John Witherspoon, one of the signers of the
Declaration of Independence, said: "Pure democracy
cannot subsist long nor be carried far into
the departments of state – it is very subject
to caprice and the madness of popular rage."
Alexander Hamilton said, "That a pure democracy
if it were practicable would be the most perfect
government. Experience has proved that no
position is more false than this. The ancient
democracies in which the people themselves
deliberated never possessed one good feature
of government. Their very character was tyranny;
their figure, deformity."Despite the framers'
intentions in the beginning of the republic,
ballot measures and their corresponding referendums
have been widely used at the state and sub-state
level. There is much state and federal case
law, from the early 1900s to the 1990s, that
protects the people's right to each of these
direct democracy governance components (Magleby,
1984, and Zimmerman, 1999). The first United
States Supreme Court ruling in favor of the
citizen lawmaking was in Pacific States Telephone
and Telegraph Company v. Oregon, 223 U.S.
118 in 1912 (Zimmerman, December 1999). President
Theodore Roosevelt, in his "Charter of Democracy"
speech to the 1912 Ohio constitutional convention,
stated: "I believe in the Initiative and Referendum,
which should be used not to destroy representative
government, but to correct it whenever it
becomes misrepresentative."In various states,
referendums through which the people rule
include:
Referrals by the legislature to the people
of "proposed constitutional amendments" (constitutionally
used in 49 states, excepting only Delaware
– Initiative & Referendum Institute, 2004).
Referrals by the legislature to the people
of "proposed statute laws" (constitutionally
used in all 50 states – Initiative & Referendum
Institute, 2004).
Constitutional amendment initiative is a constitutionally-defined
petition process of "proposed constitutional
law", which, if successful, results in its
provisions being written directly into the
state's constitution. Since constitutional
law cannot be altered by state legislatures,
this direct democracy component gives the
people an automatic superiority and sovereignty,
over representative government (Magelby, 1984).
It is utilized at the state level in nineteen
states: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana,
Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,
Oregon and South Dakota (Cronin, 1989). Among
these states, there are three main types of
the constitutional amendment initiative, with
different degrees of involvement of the state
legislature distinguishing between the types
(Zimmerman, December 1999).
Statute law initiative is a constitutionally-defined,
citizen-initiated petition process of "proposed
statute law", which, if successful, results
in law being written directly into the state's
statutes. The statute initiative is used at
the state level in twenty-one states: Alaska,
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Idaho,
Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri,
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington
and Wyoming (Cronin, 1989). Note that, in
Utah, there is no constitutional provision
for citizen lawmaking. All of Utah's I&R law
is in the state statutes (Zimmerman, December
1999). In most states, there is no special
protection for citizen-made statutes; the
legislature can begin to amend them immediately.
Statute law referendum is a constitutionally-defined,
citizen-initiated petition process of the
"proposed veto of all or part of a legislature-made
law", which, if successful, repeals the standing
law. It is used at the state level in twenty-four
states: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California,
Colorado, Idaho, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana,
Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota,
Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah,
Washington and Wyoming (Cronin, 1989).
The recall election is a citizen-initiated
process which, if successful, removes an elected
official from office and replaces him or her.
The first recall device in the United States
was adopted in Los Angeles in 1903. Typically,
the process involves the collection of citizen
petitions for the recall of an elected official;
if a sufficient number of valid signatures
and collected and verified, a recall election
is triggered. In U.S. history, there have
been three gubernatorial recall elections
in U.S. history (two of which resulted in
the recall of the governor) and 38 recall
elections for state legislators (55% of which
succeeded). As of 2017, it is utilized at
the state level in nineteen states and the
District of Columbia; a larger number of states
allow the recall for local officials and school
board members. In most states, a recall petition
campaign may begin for any reason; eight states
require specific grounds for recall.
=== Zapatistas ===
Territories held by the Zapatistas in Mexico
also employ elements of direct democracy.
At a local level, people attend a general
assembly of around 300 families where anyone
over the age of 12 can participate in decision-making,
these assemblies strive to reach a consensus
but are willing to fall back to a majority
vote. Each community has 3 main administrative
structures: (1) the commissariat, in charge
of day-to day administration; (2) the council
for land control, which deals with forestry
and disputes with neighboring communities;
and (3) the agencia, a community police agency.
The communities form a federation with other
communities to create an autonomous municipalities,
which form further federations with other
municipalities to create a region. The Zapatistas
are composed of five regions, in total having
a population of around 300,000 people.
=== Rojava ===
In Syrian Kurdistan, in the cantons of Rojava,
a new model of polity is exercised by the
Kurdish freedom movement, that of Democratic
confederalism. This model has been developed
by Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the Kurdistan
Workers' Party, on the basis of the Kurdish
revolutionary experience and traditions, and
of the theory of Communalism developed by
Murray Bookchin. At the opposite of the Nation-State
model of sovereignty, Democratic confederalism
rests on the principle of radical self-government,
where political decisions are taken in popular
assemblies at the level of the commune, which
will send delegates to the confederate level
of the district and the canton. This bottom-up
political structure coexists with the democratic
self-administration, as organized in the Charter
of the Social Contract adopted by the cantons
of Rojava in 2014. These two structures constitute
a situation characterized as one of dual power
by David Graeber, though a peculiar one as
they are both formed by the same movement.Compared
to other experiences categorized as ones of
direct democracy such as OWS, the Rojava experiment
presents only several elements of direct democracy,
namely the organization of the self-governing
communes in popular assemblies where everybody
can participate, the confederation of these
communes through imperative and recallable
mandates, the rotation of charges (often biannually)
and the absence of a centralized power. In
theory, Öcalan describes the principle of
Democratic Confederalism as follows: "In contrast
to a centralist and bureaucratic understanding
of administration and exercise of power confederalism
poses a type of political self-administration
where all groups of the society and all cultural
identities can express themselves in local
meetings, general conventions and councils.".
In practice, Rojava is organized on a system
of "Four Level Councils": the Commune, the
Neighborhood, the District, and the People's
Council of West Kurdistan. Each level nominates
delegates for the next level with imperative
mandates as well as recallable mandates.As
democratic autonomy rests on the equal political
engagement of members of the community, the
Kurdish women's movement aims at changing
the historical exclusion of women from the
public sphere as well as at educating women,
creating space where they can participate
and produce their own decisions. This commitment
to women's liberation is instantiated in the
principle of dual leadership and 40 percent
quota and in the many political spaces created
for women's education as well as their political
and economic emancipation. Women are therefore
fully included in the project of direct democracy.
In order to contribute to their political
emancipation, Kurdish women created a new
science, Jineologî or "women's science",
in order to give to women access to knowledge,
the very foundation of power in society. Moreover,
political emancipation is not seen as sufficient
to ensure women's liberation if it does not
rest on the possibility of women for self-defense.
Therefore, Kurdish women created the Women's
Protection Units (YPJ) which forms, along
with the People's Protection Units (YPG),
the Kurdish armed forces.
The Rojava cantons are governed through a
combination of district and civil councils.
District councils consist of 300 members as
well as two elected co-presidents- one man
and one woman. District councils decide and
carry out administrative and economic duties
such as garbage collection, land distribution
and cooperative enterprises. `
== Democratic reform trilemma ==
Democratic theorists have identified a trilemma
due to the presence of three desirable characteristics
of an ideal system of direct democracy, which
are challenging to deliver all at once. These
three characteristics are participation – widespread
participation in the decision making process
by the people affected; deliberation – a
rational discussion where all major points
of view are weighted according to evidence;
and equality – all members of the population
on whose behalf decisions are taken have an
equal chance of having their views taken into
account. Empirical evidence from dozens of
studies suggests deliberation leads to better
decision making. The most popularly disputed
form of direct popular participation is the
referendum on constitutional matters.For the
system to respect the principle of political
equality, either everyone needs to be involved
or there needs to be a representative random
sample of people chosen to take part in the
discussion. In the definition used by scholars
such as James Fishkin, deliberative democracy
is a form of direct democracy which satisfies
the requirement for deliberation and equality
but does not make provision to involve everyone
who wants to be included in the discussion.
Participatory democracy, by Fishkin's definition,
allows inclusive participation and deliberation,
but at a cost of sacrificing equality, because
if widespread participation is allowed, sufficient
resources rarely will be available to compensate
people who sacrifice their time to participate
in the deliberation. Therefore, participants
tend to be those with a strong interest in
the issue to be decided and often will not
therefore be representative of the overall
population. Fishkin instead argues that random
sampling should be used to select a small,
but still representative, number of people
from the general public.Fishkin concedes it
is possible to imagine a system that transcends
the trilemma, but it would require very radical
reforms if such a system were to be integrated
into mainstream politics.
== Electronic direct democracy ==
== Relation to other movements ==
Anarchists have advocated forms of direct
democracy as an alternative to the centralized
state and capitalism; however, others (such
as individualist anarchists) have criticized
direct democracy and democracy in general
for ignoring the rights of the minority, and
instead have advocated a form of consensus
decision-making. Libertarian Marxists, however,
fully support direct democracy in the form
of the proletarian republic and see majority
rule and citizen participation as virtues.
The Young Communist League USA in particular
refers to representative democracy as "bourgeois
democracy", implying that they see direct
democracy as "true democracy".
== In schools ==
Democratic schools modeled on Summerhill School
resolve conflicts and make school policy decisions
through full school meetings in which the
votes of students and staff are weighted equally.
== Contemporary movements ==
== See also ==
Cherán
Libertarian municipalism
Libertarian socialism
Non-representative democracy
Participatory budgeting
Participatory economics
Populism
Proxy voting, esp. delegated voting
Reform of the United Nations :United Nations
Parliamentary Assembly, direct elected parliamentarians
instead of administrations' diplomaticians
and United Nations Secretary-General elect
by popular vote.
Semi-direct democracy
Social democracy
Sociocracy
Soviet democracy
Third International Theory
Workers' councils
== Notes and references ==
== Bibliography ==
Cary, M.; Scullard, H. H. (1967). A History
Of Rome: Down To The Reign Of Constantine
(2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press.
Cronin, Thomas E. (1989). Direct Democracy:
The Politics of Initiative, Referendum and
Recall. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Elster, Jon (1998). "Introduction". In Elster,
Jon. Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge Studies
in the Theory of Democracy. Cambridge University
Press. ISBN 9780521592963. (Subscription required
(help)).
Fishkin, James S. (2011). When the People
Speak. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199604432.
Golay, Vincent (2008). Swiss Political Institutions.
Illustrated by Mix & Remix. Le Mont-sur-Lausanne:
Éditions loisirs et pédagogie. ISBN 9782606012953.
Gutmann, Amy; Thompson, Dennis F. (2004).
Why Deliberative Democracy?. Princeton: Princeton
University Press. ISBN 9780691120188. Retrieved
8 April 2014.
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011a), The Swiss Government
Report 1, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs
FDFA, Presence Switzerland – via YouTube
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011b), The Swiss Government
Report 2, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs
FDFA, Presence Switzerland – via YouTube
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011c), How Direct Democracy
Works In Switzerland – Report 3, Federal
Department of Foreign Affairs FDFA, Presence
Switzerland – via YouTube
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011d), How People in Switzerland
Vote – Report 4, Federal Department of Foreign
Affairs FDFA, Presence Switzerland – via
YouTube
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011e), Switzerland & the
EU: The Bilateral Agreements – Report 5,
Federal Department of Foreign Affairs FDFA,
Presence Switzerland – via YouTube
Kobach, Kris W. (1993). The Referendum: Direct
Democracy In Switzerland. Dartmouth Publishing
Company. ISBN 9781855213975.
Raaflaub, Kurt A.; Ober, Josiah; Wallace,
Robert W. (2007). Origins of Democracy in
Ancient Greece. Berkeley: University of California
Press. ISBN 9780520932173.
Razsa, Maple. (2015) Bastards of Utopia: Living
Radical Politics After Socialism. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Ross, Carne (2011). The Leaderless Revolution:
How Ordinary People Can Take Power and Change
Politics in the 21st Century. London: Simon
& Schuster. ISBN 9781847375346.
Stokes, Susan C. (1998). "Pathologies of Deliberation".
In Elster, Jon. Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge
Studies in the Theory of Democracy. Cambridge
University Press. ISBN 9780521592963. (Subscription
required (help)).
Watts, Duncan (2010). Dictionary of American
Government and Politics. Edinburgh University.
p. 75. ISBN 9780748635016.
Zagarri, Rosemarie (2010). The Politics of
Size: Representation in the United States,
1776–1850. Cornell University. ISBN 9780801476396.
== Further reading ==
== External links ==
