What's wrong with the elite theory of democracy?

Résumé du document

The elite theory of democracy has emerged out of two major concerns of its precursors: no theory of democracy until now has given leadership the importance it ought to have, and none has really settled the issue of whether the common man is up to the task of governing a modern and large society. From empirical facts, some theorists have argued that every single modern society is ruled by a class that knows better and has better skills to govern: the elite. Primarily aimed at explaining the on-going structure of our societies, the elite theory of democracy can also result in some normative statements. Indeed, the participative form of democracy is clearly rejected by the theorists, who argue that too much participation would actually weaken democracy rather than reassert it. They argue that masses are incompetent, and thus unable to act "in default of an initiative from without and from above".

Extraits

[...] What's wrong with the elite theory of democracy? there were a people of gods, they would govern themselves democratically. A government so perfect is not suited to The elite theory of democracy has emerged out of two major concerns of its precursors: no theory of democracy until now has given leadership the importance it ought to have, and none has really settled the issue of whether the common man is up to the task of governing a modern and large society. [...]

[...] Etzioni-Halevy 1993, p95, in Ruostetsaari M. Burton and J. Higgley, study of Political Elite Transformations', International Review of Sociology, Vol.11, No 2. 181-199, cited in Ruostetsaari p.5. Robert D. Putnam, The Comparative Study of Political Elites, Chapter 6 “Elite-Mass Linkage”, Englewood Cliffs, N.J; London : Prentice-Hall, c1976. p.137. Mosca p.71. Putnam p.147 Dahl and Tufte p.75, in Putnam p.147. Putnam p.142. [...]

[...] Gaetano Mosca, The Ruling Class (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1939), p.50. Ibid. Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democray, Chapter XXIII “Another Theory of Democracy”, (London : Allen and Unwin, 1976), p269. Ilkka Ruostetsaari, “Coexistence of elites and democracy in an information society”, this article was presented to the Hawaii International Conference on Social Sciences, June 12- http://www.hicsocial.org/Social2003Proceedings/Ilkka%20Ruostetsaari.pdf S.M. Lipset cited in Peter Bachrach, The theory of democratic elitism : a critique , Washington, D.C. : University Press of America, c1980. See Bachrach, ibid. Chapter 3 “Revolt from the masses”. [...]

[...] Development as a human-being is understood to include this participation in problems-sloving by most of the classical theorists, e.g. Roussean, Kant, Mill, etc. See Bachrach (1980). The notion of consensus will be discussed below. Bachrach, (1980), p.100. Susan Marks, The Riddle of All Constitutions: International Law, Democracy and the Critique of Ideology, (Oxford, New York: OUP, 2000). (Book Review by Richard Falk, ASIL Vol.96, No (Jan., 2002), 264-268. David Truman, The American System in Crisis Political Science Quaterly, (December, 1959), pp.481-497. Mosca cited in Geraint Parry, Political Elites, London: Allen & Unwin Ruostetsaari p.11. Mosca p.50. [...]

[...] It appears then not so likely to reach a consensus. However, the need for consensus raises an essential issue: if elites act in concert, there might be a risk of subversion of the system. Indeed, the competitive component of the theory appears threatened, and we hence face the risk that elites are no longer constrained by the mass in anyway. I do not believe we can accept a theory that would rest upon the conscience of the elite to refrain from abusing its privileged position. [...]