Competitive Elitism: Democracy as a Political Market Mechanism

The Market Mechanism Model of Democracy

Democracy in this model is characterized by the following:

1. A system to elect prepared and authorized government elites.
2. The elite selection system is competition between two or more self-selected groups of politicians.
3. Voters do not deliberate and decide on policy issues; rather, their role is choosing the people who make such decisions.

In this model, democracy resembles a market mechanism in which entrepreneurs are politicians and voters are the consumers. This political model aims to produce a balance between the diversity of interests and the sovereignty of consumers.

Consequences and Implications of the Model

Important consequences of this model are:

• To highlight the importance of the quality of elites in the functioning of democracies.
• Highlighting the objective of solving political problems by balancing competing interests.
• Establishing jurisdiction as the mechanism that ensures the best selection of elites, the balance of interests, and consumer sovereignty.

According to some authors, such as Robert Dahl, the most appropriate term to define these political systems is polyarchy.

Theoretical Foundations: Rational Choice and Game Theory

Approaches like Game Theory, Rational Choice Theory, and Public Choice Theory posit that individuals are rational and selfish beings who seek to maximize profits and minimize their losses in every election. Thus, voters (political consumers) act rationally in the political market, geared towards achieving control of the government.

Criticisms of the Competitive Model

Critics argue that this model assumes a desubstantialization of the concept of democracy. It reduces democracy to a formal procedure for the selection of individuals under certain conditions, thereby neglecting key concepts necessary to understand a democratic regime.

The Problem of Inequality and Oligopoly

Some have questioned whether the political market is inherently inegalitarian. Under these conditions, the outcome of the competition is a permanent and structural imbalance that could lead to an oligopoly market. This oligopoly would eventually fail to meet the political demands of consumers, since voters must decide between alternatives over which they have little influence regarding number or characteristics.

This critique suggests that democracy becomes a system for handling multiple demands, where demand itself might even be manufactured.

Competitive Pluralism and Model Overlaps

Competitive pluralism often leads to a direct political recommendation: increasing the number of groups, parties, and factions. In the model analyzed, equilibrium depends on the pluralism of power groups.

All three models (implied) emphasize different aspects in defining democracy. However, there are significant overlaps between the models:

• None of the models deny the importance of the key elements of the other two.
• All models share the idea that certain elements are necessary for any of their systems to function.