Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Deciding the demos: three conceptions of democratic legitimacy
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science. Institute for Futures Studies, Sweden.
2017 (English)In: Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, ISSN 1369-8230, E-ISSN 1743-8772Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

The prevailing view is that democratic procedures are unable to confer democratic legitimacy to decisions about democratic procedures. This paper examines this claim in detail and uses referendums on the inclusion of previously disenfranchised groups in the demos as a running example. The paper distinguishes between pure, imperfect and quasi-pure models of procedural democratic legitimacy and sub-versions of them. To various extents, each model does have the capacity to confer legitimacy to demos decisions under well-defined circumstances. The paper argues that quasi-pure procedural legitimacy represents the most promising account of democratic legitimacy in cases where democratic procedures are the subject of collective decision-making. According to this model, the decision to revise the rules for membership in the demos is permissible by democratic standards if and only if the revision is not forbidden by democratic principles for inclusion. The point is that the range of alternatives that are not forbidden by democratic principles of inclusion are likely to be considerable due to vagueness of the principles themselves and/or them being subject to reasonable disagreement. The paper concludes with a discussion about the possibility of democratic legitimacy for democratic institutions not introduced as a result of democratic decision-making.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017.
Keyword [en]
Democratic legitimacy, demos decisions, procedural democracy, referendum, voting rights
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)
Research subject
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-148138DOI: 10.1080/13698230.2017.1390661OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-148138DiVA, id: diva2:1149743
Available from: 2017-10-16 Created: 2017-10-16 Last updated: 2018-04-25

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1345 kB)26 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1345 kBChecksum SHA-512
1b7551b9ef62fc77acb59449dd0c7f159381c93fd0b7a6854f2c7a8a37c816f4efaed65d3af964517477c9ff42936da65de9b8eb0935dcab65463f262fc3d2aa
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Beckman, Ludvig
By organisation
Department of Political Science
In the same journal
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 26 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 71 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf