The Evolution of Political Representation and Democracy

Defining Democracy: From Schumpeter to Modernity

Our definition of democracy, in its simplicity and minimalism, was very Schumpeterian. Representative democracy is a kind of etymological nostalgia, while the general perception leans toward direct democracy. Post-Schumpeterian political science has introduced a range of terms designed to quantify how the government of the people occurs within these frameworks. Concepts that rescue the uses of representation are not without political significance and scope; they are meant to inform the electoral and legal reforms needed to achieve it.

Direct democracy and representative democracy are seen as two different stages in the evolution of a single model. Pitkin has emphasized the curious nature of the identification between these two models. The peculiarity of the perception regarding political representation produces this identification: almost anyone who supports democracy doubts that representation is its modern form. Failures in representative government are often attributed to a particular electoral system, a party system, or the exclusion of specific groups from voting. Political representation refers to a desirable similarity between rulers and the ruled, pointing to a normative horizon that goes beyond the meaning we favor regarding popular participation in the election of rulers.

A Brief History of Political Representation and Participation

Modern democracies are embroiled in a problem that is apparently only terminological but contains within itself enormous consequences of political significance. Modern democracy is, by definition, a representative democracy.

1. Democracy and Republic

Modern democracy is heir to an ancient tradition. This adversarial tradition was understood as a fair and stable alternative against distinct forms of government—specifically, the unstable form of tyranny exercised by the many over the whole population. Freedom in the republican tradition assimilated oriented government to moderate stability. The republican tradition became a protection against the arbitrary condition of freedom and stability.

It postulated the abandonment of pure forms of government and the establishment of a mixed form that provided a double balance: a balanced government and a stable government. The Roman Republic was for many years the paradigm of this model, and the English monarchy of the 17th century served to fan the flames of republicanism in our past. For a long time, democracy was perceived as a tiresome form of despotism, and the only acceptable form of popular participation in governance has been linked to the republican tradition.