List of Tables and Figures Preface to the Second Edition · politics persists only because humans make the wrong choices: if they fol-: . politics of mass democracies . religion,

vii

Contents

List of Tables and Figures x

Preface to First Edition xi

Preface to the Second Edition xiii

List of Abbreviations xv

Introduction 1The Dynamics of Politics 1Why Politics? 3Why Politics Matters 5Democratic Politics in Trouble: An Overview of

the Argument 7

Part I Mass Democracy: Triumph and Disappointment 17

1 The Triumph of Democracy? 19The Nature of Democratic Governance 20Democracy as a Universal Value 21The Triumph of Democracy? 25Conclusions: Counter-Forces? 29

2 Global Dissatisfaction with Politics 32Patterns of Political Disenchantment 34The Steady Decliners 35The Steep Decliners 41The Basement Decliners 44The Modest Decliners 45Should Disenchantment Be a Matter of Concern? 46

3 Explanations for Political Disenchantment 50Might Social Change Be Driving Negativity Towards Politics? 51Attitudinal Change: Citizen Alienation from Politics 57Process Failure: How Politics Has Changed for the Worse 61Outcome Failure 65Conclusion: Different Pathways to Anti-Politics 69

Copyrighted material – 9780230360662


viii Contents

4 The Politics of Mass Democracies: Designed-In Disappointment? 71Introduction 71Proposition 1: Politics is an inherently centralized form of

collective decision making 73Proposition 2: Politics is driven by complex communication

that is demanding and prone to failure 77Proposition 3: Political decisions usually involve mutual

adjustment among governing elites and result in messy outcomes and a complex distribution of costs and benefits 81

Conclusions 85

Part II The Pathologies of Political Practice 87

5 The Decline of Citizen Engagement? 89How Do Most Citizens Engage? 90Uneven Capacity to Participate: Exploring and Addressing

the Issues 93Concerns about the Quality of Participation 98Conclusions 102

6 The Professionalization of Politics: The Emergence of Multispeed Activism 104Party Activists 105The Rise of the Citizen Lobby 109Protest and Dissent 114Concluding Comment: Participation by and Through

Experts 117

7 The Dangers of Cynicism 120Why Cynicism Matters 120Public Choice Theory: An Academic Framing for Cynicism? 122Do Politicians Lie More Today? 126The Role of the Media: Defender of Democracy or Creator

of Corrosive Cynicism? 128A Failure of Moral Accounting? 130Conclusions 133

8 The Perils of Populism 134Exploring Populism 135Populism in Action 139Populism and Democratic Theory: A Minor Detour 141



Contents ix

Assessing Populism 143Concluding Note 146

Part III Searching for Solutions 149

9 Politics for Amateurs 151Political Engagement is Good (Up to a Point) 153Over-Prescription of Citizen Engagement 156Intensive Engagement is not Always Effective or an

Option Open to All Citizens 160Towards a Strategy of Engagement: Public and Civic

Politics 162

10 Reviving Political Institutions 165Making Representation Better 168Three Mainstream Reforms 171Three Unconventional Reforms 175A New Architecture of Multilevel Governance 176A Challenge to Politicians and Activists 182Conclusions 186

11 Creating a New Civic Arena 187Democratic Innovations 189Is the Internet a Game Changer? 200Is Counter Democracy the Answer? 204Information Flow and Understanding: Citizen Education

and the Media 204Concluding Note 208

Conclusions 209What Reforms Do the Public Favour? 209What Are the Prospects for Reform? 213Who Should Lead Reform? 215The Challenge 215Postscript: the UK’s EU referendum and a plea for a better

politics 216

Notes and References 219

Index 239



1

Introduction

The Dynamics of Politics

Negativity about the practice of politics is not news to many politicians anymore. Indeed, some politicians seem to be intent on taking advantage of it by offering populist stances on issues and by distancing themselves very clearly from something called the ‘political establishment’. The top nomi-nations for 2016 might well have been Donald Trump in the United States and Boris Johnson in Britain, leading the Leave campaign in the EU mem-bership referendum, but as we shall see later in the book there are plenty of competitors. Many politicians have developed something of a gallows humour about it. Gavin Shuker, a UK Member of Parliament (MP), writes:

Every MP has their own favourite moment on ‘The Tour’. It’s a routine that each Member must develop – a witty and insightful commentary to accompany the leading of visitors around the Palace of Westminster. Mine is the revelation that, as fire destroyed the old building in 1834, crowds gathered on the south bank of the Thames to celebrate and applaud its destruction. Anti-politics sentiment has always run deep in Britain.1

Other politicians offer convoluted apologies to public audiences for being a politician. Isobel Harding, a journalist at a meeting I was chairing in 2016, argued that she would throw up if she heard another politician explain how they only took up the job ‘by accident’. They were an engineer or doctor – or some other occupation deemed socially acceptable – turned up at some political event and then, seemingly through forces outside their control, found themselves as a candidate for election and then eventually an elected representative.

If politicians are aware they are close to being social pariahs as a group, then most citizens would not try to persuade them that the situation is oth-erwise. In 2011–12, we asked people to indicate what words they asso-ciated with politics.2 We grouped the words they overwhelmingly chose under eight headings: deception, corruption, feather-nesting, self-serving, politicking, privileged, boring and incomprehensible (see Table 2.2 on p. 41 for more detail). Not a terribly positive list, I think you would agree. Would citizens want the job themselves? An excellent study of young Americans asked exactly that question and came up with a very clear ‘no chance’



2 Why Politics Matters

response. Aliza, an 18-year-old student from Ohio, spoke for many when she told the researchers: ‘I’m pretty sure that whatever I do, I won’t run for office. I’d hate to live my life like that, the way that people act in politics.’3

We know that millions around the world like the idea of democratic gov-ernance in the abstract but struggle to be convinced by the politics essential to its delivery. This book tries to understand this contradiction and, because politics matters, it asks what, if anything, we could do to make it work better.

The book takes a broad view of the main issues confronting all democ-racies in the twenty-first century, but given the limitations of space and the experiences and capacities of the author it gives more attention to the politics of longer-established industrial democracies. While the problems and solutions to the current malaise of democratic politics will vary from country to country, I believe that my focus on common features and key comparisons provides a good starting point for discussion of where we are, and what needs to be done.

The negative response to politics that many of us share is, I think, a very human reaction to the way politics works. As an intricate mechanism in our multifaceted and complex societies, politics exists because we do not agree with one another. Politics is about choosing between competing interests and views often demanding incompatible allocations of limited resources. Crucially, because it is a collective form of decision making, once a choice has been made then that choice has to be imposed on us all. There is no point having a rule that vehicles on a road must stop at a red traffic light unless it is universally observed and enforced. Politics at the level of today’s large-scale, interconnected and diverse societies is on a tough beat. Our col-lective will – which is what politics is supposed to express – is not easy to fathom, or always comfortable to accept once it is decided upon. The central argument of this book is that politics matters and getting it right matters.

The external environment for politics has arguably got harder. Globaliza-tion appears to be taking decisions out of the hands of politicians and citi-zens rooted in nation states. Institutions such as the EU have become a focus of debate, with some claiming they allow us to extend some sort of demo-cratic influence in a globalized world and others arguing that its powers and reach undermine national democracy. The rapid scale of our technological development and issues such as the global warming of our planet create challenges that some fear may be beyond the capacity of sovereignty poli-tics to tackle effectively. Do we need government by authoritative experts to save our planet? Finally, a wide range of social and cultural changes seems to be making many of our societies more individualistic and less cohesive. Added together, these factors may well have made politics harder, and may



Introduction 3

explain in part our sense of disenchantment with it. But politics is not just failing because the challenges are tougher.

There are a number of internal pathologies to the dynamics of politics that need to be examined. The way that politics is done today rubs up people the wrong way. People have a number of common fears or preconceptions when it comes to living in society and politics tends to bring those fears and preconceptions to the fore. People don’t like to be taken for a sucker or treated like an idiot. Politics as experienced on a daily basis often seems cal-culated to feed that fear. When politicians debate issues in simplistic terms, when they imply that we can have it all at no cost and appear to manufacture arguments they think will play well to different groups, it is hardly surpris-ing that we think they are taking us for a ride. Nor is it odd that cynicism becomes a common coping response. People often find it difficult to think beyond their own experiences and therefore tend to judge political decisions according to their own interests and circumstances. Naïve aspirations and assumptions about politics often flow from these preconceptions. People tend to assume that most other people agree with them (or would do if only the issue was explained to them properly) and that the ideal outcome is one that suits them in every detail. People generally do not like making a lot of effort for little reward. Accordingly, offloading responsibility onto others is a very common coping mechanism in political exchanges.

I argue in this book that politics matters more than most people in democ-racies give it credit for, and it is more demanding of them than they fully realize. Equally I am clear that we need to change some of the practices of politics. You can have politics without democracy – that is, you can have authoritarian government with people making collective decisions on your behalf without accountability to you – but you can’t have democracy with-out politics. For democracy to work, citizens need opportunities to engage and they need to understand the messiness and demands of politics. Social media may be changing the technological expression of politics but it does not mean the fundamental nature of politics has changed.

Why Politics?

This book is premised on a belief that politics matters, and that it matters so much we can’t afford to be stupid, naïve or cynical about it, and more-over we cannot afford to entirely offload our responsibilities to engage in it. To explore this statement a little further, it is first worth dwelling on the issues of what politics is, and whether it has to exist. There have been many disputes over these two questions stretching over centuries.4 I have already




suggested that politics reflects the existence of conflicts of interests and opinions. But is it inevitable that politics must exist? You might argue that politics persists only because humans make the wrong choices: if they fol-lowed the right path, set down by religion or some other moral guide, they would all choose the same thing and as a result politics would not be neces-sary. You might alternatively argue that politics operates only in societies that are structured so that people’s interests are fundamentally opposed, but that it might be possible to structure a society where people’s interests were always aligned and as a result politics would not be required. The former argument has at various times been made by some religious and other mor-alizing opinion leaders. The latter is one used by some radicals and utopians of various hues. Neither is particular convincing to me, and neither can take much succour from the historical record to date. There is little to suggest that human beings or human societies are perfectible, as implied by these contrasting understandings.

It is difficult to be certain about human nature. But I think it is reasonable to take as a starting point the idea that people are capable of terrible deeds, but also capable of great acts. It is equally difficult to always be sure what is in someone’s best interests, so it seems impossible to establish a society where some interests do not clash. Given human society as it has been, and as it might reasonably be expected to be in the future, people will make their own judgements about what is right for themselves and for others and there is no basis to assume that those judgements will be shared. Equally, it is clear that as humans we need to find ways to act together, to engage in col-lective action and to resolve the problems and challenges of living together. So politics, as John Dunn defines it, can be seen as:

[T]he struggles which result from the collisions between human pur-poses: most clearly when these collisions involve large numbers of human beings … It takes in, too, the immense array of expedients and practices which human beings have invented to cooperate, as much as to compete, with one another.5

Politics is constructed in order to express conflicts and allow different inter-ests to shape our collective endeavours. So politics is about trying to get what you want for yourself, or alongside others, for a common cause. Poli-tics is also ultimately something to do with rule, with the ordering of our societies. Politics is about reaching a compromise, and finding ways for those who disagree to rub along with one another.

Some people argue that there is a strong distinction between a ‘big P’ politics of government conducted at a national (or perhaps an international)



Introduction 5

level and a ‘small p’ politics of civil society that takes place in communities and associations of citizens.6 There are, indeed, different sites or locations for politics, and part of a better approach to politics in democracies might be to extend the scope of a politics of civil society alongside allowing citizens greater access to the more mainstream ‘big P’ politics. We shall cover these issues in Part III of the book. For now, it is important to emphasize that there is no escape from politics. Whether at a ‘big P’ level or ‘small p’ level, politics involves expressing and resolving differences and findings ways of cooperating to achieve collective actions. In civil society, differences exist as much as they do in the ‘big P’ politics of nation states and international relations. Romantic thinking about community and civil society should not blind us to the reality that because we are human we disagree and seek dif-ferent things. We need politics not only to express but also to manage those disagreements and, if possible, find ways to cooperate.

Why Politics Matters

Politics matters because collective decisions matter. Perhaps the very rich-est in society are in a position where they could opt out and live on a desert island free from the rest of us, but even there they can’t escape the impact of global warming and our collective effect on our environment as sea levels rise. For almost everyone else, what happens in the wider society makes a huge difference to their ability to get a job, access education or receive health care. What happens in the wider society matters to us all – and that means that politics matters too, because it is through politics that we can influence what happens in that wider world. And that does not only apply to politics on the grand stage of national and international politics, but also to the politics of civil society, the communities in which you live and the associations that structure your life.

Politics matters because there are conflicts and differences of perspective in society about what to do, what resources to collect for public use and how those resources should be spent. The idea that people disagree may at first seem uncontroversial; but one constant suspicion that people have about politics is that many disagreements are trumped up and that the great show of difference that politicians and the media sometimes try to emphasize is somehow false.7 Sometimes it is true that disagreements are a result of mis-understanding and that discussion and debate can mitigate it, but on many occasions conflict has a very solid base. To understand politics, one must above all understand the inevitable partiality of judgement. Judgement is particular to an individual because it reflects their unique set of experiences.




Throughout the ages, people have hoped that wise and incorruptible indi-viduals could be found to make judgements on all our parts, avoiding the unpleasant necessity of politics by allowing others, more expert and gifted, to decide. But judgement is always partial because it comes from the whole breadth of human experience. As John Dunn puts it: ‘what partiality rests on is the lives which each of us live’.8 No one else can live our life and there-fore no one else can make all judgements for us.

People can value some things more than others. At the very grand level, a lot of politics is about different views of ‘the good life’. A central divide for much of the last two centuries has been between those who prefer lib-erty over equality and those who privilege equality over liberty. At a more prosaic level, a lot of politics is about hanging on to what you have got, and politics often involves crude power struggles over who gets what. Politics does not always involve grand visions of right and wrong, but rather its focus is on fighting to get or keep a share of resources. More challenging still can be political arguments about identity and entitlements. Issues of ethnicity and the rights of different social groups can often lead to great problems in finding sustainable political solutions if those basic rights are disputed or challenged by another group. The concern to define who and what you are is a constant source of political conflict in our diverse soci-eties, and it is a form of disagreement that is very hard to manage within democracies. Violent conflict, civil wars and even genocide can result from these types of conflict.

Some matters are just more important to some people than others. And at different stages of your life you may be concerned about different things, from student loans to pensions. So a lot of politics involves the ‘don’t cares’ on a particular issue versus the ‘care-a-lots’, because they are directly affected. Indeed, one of the main things that people disagree about is what should be on the political agenda of society and therefore be something that politics should do something about. A lot of politics is about getting some-thing on the ‘to-do list’ of governments at all levels.

If everyone agreed we should value the environment and the future of the earth (and it is difficult to argue we should not) there would be plenty of scope for disagreement about what to do, what course of action to take and at what level of urgency. So if people agree about the goal there remain a lot of arguments to be had about the means to achieve the goal. A lot of col-lective decision making involves redistribution, and so politics can involve intense arguments about who gets what. Politics often involves regulation or intervention that passes costs on to some rather than others. And in the details of implementation – the way that a policy is put into effect – there is plenty of scope for further differences of opinion and interest.



Introduction 7

Politics matters because it reflects the tensions created when human beings rub against each other and at times it does more than just express those conflicts: it finds a way of settling them. Politics is one way to address and potentially patch up the disagreements that characterize our societies without recourse to illegitimate coercion or violence. Politics, especially in democratic societies, enables people to compromise and reach an agree-ment. It is a means to orderly and legitimate self-rule. As Bernard Crick puts it in his classic book In Defence of Politics:

Politics is simply the activity by which government is made possible when differing interests in an area to be governed grow powerful enough to need to be conciliated … Other paths are always open. Politics is sim-ply … that solution to the problem of order which chooses conciliation rather than violence and coercion, and chooses it as an effective way by which varying interests can discover that level of compromise best suited to their common survival.9

In other words, politics can provide a means of getting on with your fellow human beings that aims to find a way forward through reconciliation and compromise without recourse to straightforward coercion or outright vio-lence. It provides a way to live in an ordered manner with your neighbours, but one that unavoidably often calls on you to sign up to deals and compro-mises that might not be your first or even tenth choice, but which neverthe-less have something in them that enables you to put up with them. It might not be very inspiring, but when it works, politics delivers one great benefit: it enables you to choose, within constraints, the life you want without fear of physical coercion and violence being used against you. Politics creates space for human choices and diverse lifestyles. Politics, if done well, cre-ates the positive context and stable environment for you to live your life. That’s why politics matters.

Democratic Politics in Trouble: An Overview of the Argument

Democracy as a particular way of practising politics has gained consider-able ground in the last few decades. Around two-thirds of all the countries in the world have a basic set of democratic institutions built around competi-tive elections that enable all adult citizens to choose and remove their gov-ernment leaders. As we shall see, some countries have struggled to maintain even these basic democratic requirements and in most democracies there appears to be a considerable amount of discontent and disenchantment




about the operation of politics. Mass democracy, practised with a univer-sal suffrage, has less than a century’s worth of experience. Democracy is a demanding way of doing the politics of compromise and reconciliation because it rests on the fundamental idea that all adult citizens have a right to a say in matters that affect them. So perhaps we should not be surprised that democratic politics is proving to have difficulties in practice that we still need to learn to overcome. According to the social theorist Max Weber:

Politics is a strong and slow boring of hard boards. It takes both passion and perspective … And even those who are neither leaders nor heroes must arm themselves with that steadfastness of heart which can brave even the crumbling of all hopes.10

Max Weber, writing at the beginning of the twentieth century, thought that modern democratic politics would be the preserve of professional politi-cians and activists for whom politics was a vocation. These activists and leaders would require imagination and commitment but also willingness to compromise and make hard choices. Yet even the mostly unengaged citi-zenry would require a certain steadfastness of heart to stay with the political process. But today many citizens appear to be alienated by the profession-alization of politics and dissatisfied with their allocated position as passive and patient observers of the decision making of others.

The book is not a dispassionate analysis, although it aims to offer clear analytical frameworks for thinking through the issues and to provide an accurate account of some of the most important ways that we currently con-duct politics in democracies. Alongside the analysis there is a concern with how things ought to be, as well as a focus on how they are. This book looks at the rights and wrongs of our current democratic politics and eventually, in Part III, how we might go about improving our practice of politics. Part I of the book provides an analytical and empirical account of our discontents with democracy and how they might be explained, alongside normative judgements about what democratic politics is about and, by implication, how it should be conducted. Part II of the book is the most heavily empiri-cal. It analyses the ways that citizens are engaged, or not engaged, in politics in democracies, but it too does not shy away from normative judgements about whether certain types of engagement are good or bad for democracy. Part III of the book is the most straightforwardly normative, in that it turns its attention to how politics in democracies might be made to work better. However, there are strong analytical and empirical strands even in this sec-tion as the aim of the book is not just to explore ideas about what might be done but also point towards new practices.



Introduction 9

Mass Democracy: Triumph and Disappointment

Chapter 1 begins our exploration by arguing that getting politics in democ-racies to work is a worthwhile challenge. Democracy is rightly a celebrated guide to how we should take collective decisions in our societies. The start-ing idea of democracy is that all adult citizens should have a voice in respect of decisions made in the societies in which they live. The practice of democratic governance requires free and fair elections to choose govern-ment leaders and a range of other freedoms (such as freedom of speech and assembly) and basic respect for human rights. Beyond these basic starting points there are, of course, differences of view about how democracy can best be expressed and achieved. Above all, democracy needs to be seen as a universal value. It is not simply a Western ideology. People everywhere have reason to see its basic premises as valuable. It is an integral part of human nature to value the opportunity to be involved in decisions about issues that affect you. Democracy, in turn, protects a wider commitment to freedom and respect for human rights. Your right to engage is only validated by the rights of others to engage also being respected. Democracy also delivers at a basic level. It cannot guarantee you a happy life, but it makes government and power-holders in society inclined to look after your basic necessities. Finally, democracy helps by using the knowledge embedded in different parts of society to find solutions to intractable problems. The ideas behind democratic governance appear to have wide support in many coun-tries of the world, across a range of cultures and contexts. Most people think that democracy may have some problems, but they are clear that it is better than other forms of government. Yet establishing and maintaining effec-tive democratic practices are no easy tasks, especially in divided societies. Democracy has spread as a practice to many countries but some countries have stepped back from its use and all countries have struggled to deliver its full ambitions.

Within both established and newer democracies, there appears to be a considerable disenchantment with politics. Detailed evidence from many parts of the globe is provided to illustrate this point in Chapter 2. What emerges is a complex picture of overall decline and a set of discontents that range from a lack of confidence in the way that politics works to extreme cynicism about the process. Some degree of scepticism about politics might well be considered healthy and there may be a cycle to public engagement in politics, depending on the nature of the issues at stake. But it is difficult to escape the idea that the scale and breadth of discontent about politics raises some questions about the long-term health of democracy. People per-haps naturally do not trust politicians but, more than that, many of the key




institutions of democracies – parties, parliaments and polls – do not com-mand sufficient respect and engagement. Democracy cannot survive if its lifeblood of politics is seen as a sort of necessary evil – or, worse still, a pointless waste of time.

Chapter 3 explores various explanations of why disenchantment might have grown. We examine whether social changes might be driving anti- politics or whether changing norms and attitudes among citizens might be behind the phenomenon. These first two categories of explanations imply that something has changed about citizens that have made politics a more alien-ating or challenging experience for them. However, two other categories of explanation rest on the idea that the practice or performance of politics may have changed the relationship of politics with citizens for the worse. The political system or politicians may have changed in a way that makes citizens find the inherently difficult processes of politics even harder to accept. More-over, positive outcomes from politics may have become more complicated to deliver, leaving more citizens pondering what its point is. In different coun-tries, it is likely that various mixes of the dozen factors identified under our four headings have played their part in creating political negativity.

Chapter 4 suggests that there may be one overarching factor that also helps to explain political disenchantment: that a number of misunderstand-ings of the political process have taken hold in the discourse of democracies. The pressure from the increased prominence given to market-based con-sumerism in the culture of many democracies has led key aspects of politics to be overlooked. As a result, many citizens fail to fully appreciate that politics in the end involves the collective imposition of decisions, demands a complex communication process and generally produces messy compro-mise. Yes, the big ‘sell’ of politics is the imposition of collective decisions, the dull dynamics, the mendacity, the compromises and the reconciliation of opponents. In that sense politics is designed to disappoint. Its outcomes are often messy, ambiguous and never final. Part of the trick is to recognize that it is possible to return to an issue later. Politics involves that hardest of human skills: listening carefully to the opinions of others and their expres-sions of their interests. Doing politics in a small group is hard enough and the greater prospects of misinformation, muddle and malaise in our large complex societies are bound to create some frustration. Democracy cannot wish away that reality.

The Pathologies of Political Practice

Part II of the book explores the argument that it is not just that we character-ize and understand politics in a mistaken way, but that there are problems



Introduction 11

and difficulties with the way we practise it as well. Most citizens’ engage-ment has a sporadic and mundane character and an uneven and very limited quality. As Chapter 5 shows, for all the opportunities that in theory might be afforded them, most people engage very little beyond occasionally casting a vote; and in some countries the number willing to do even that appears to be declining. Research indicates that when citizens do engage, they tend to undertake relatively simple acts such as signing a petition or boycot-ting a product as a way of sending a political message. Even in terms of these types of political activity there are significant differences between the civic capacity of different countries and within countries between more and less educated people. The emergence of digital forms of political engage-ment has been taken up across the generations – of course especially among younger citizens – but what is clear activism even in these new digital forms is still a sport for a minority of citizens. The broad empirical message of this chapter stands that citizens do engage in politics in a variety (and shift-ing) ways but they tend to do so occasionally rather than regularly. In terms of the quality of the engagement, there is a sense in which what counts as ‘politics’ for most people is not much more than an extension of their activi-ties as consumers. There is nothing wrong with such expressions of citi-zenship; they are just rather limited. Much engagement is directed towards something that brings personal benefit or perhaps provides an expressive statement about a person’s sense of themselves and their identity. These atomized forms of citizenship mean that people often have only a surface engagement with political issues and complexities. There is hope in the range and diversity of engagement in democracies, but there are also con-cerns because of its uneven spread and shallow quality.

Most of the real politics is done in a space where we are spectators. It is the sphere of professionals not amateurs. Chapter 6 examines the roles of high-intensity activists in party politics, citizen lobby groups and protest movements. The cohesion brought by parties, the advocacy of special inter-ests by the lobby and the challenge and dissent offered through various forms of protest offer vital links in the democratic chain between gover-nors and governed. But all are failing to engage citizens-at-large in politics. The committed activists for democracy constitute maybe fewer than 1 in 600 in any population. Activists are odd people, very much in a minority in our society. They do a lot of the work of politics for us, and we should be grateful to them but the way their organizations work is in part responsible for people’s sense of alienation from politics.

As parties have lost membership, they have become reliant on profes-sional campaigners and organizers and operate in a way that treats citizens as passive political observers that just need to be mobilized at elections




to back the party. Citizen lobby organizations – such as Friends of the Earth – have large-scale memberships, but their involvement is generally restricted to providing the necessary funding. They, too, rely on professional organizers and experts. Members provide the cash but the professional politicos in the lobby organizations decide what to campaign on. Citizens are a passive audience to be exhorted about particular campaigns through the media and occasionally galvanized to send in letters or cards of support or join a public demonstration based on often rather simplistic messages. Citizens are offered little in terms of depth of analysis or understanding of the issues at stake by these organizations. Even more radical protest organi-zations tend to be professionalized in their style of behaviour and their use of the media in both old and new versions. The occasional engagement by a wider group of citizens in a protest ‘event’, online campaign or rally is in danger of being more a lifestyle statement than a serious engagement with a political debate.

Chapter 7 argues against the corrosive influence of cynicism in the way that so many of us view politics and politicians. It challenges the academic literature that lends support to a very cynical take on politics. A central part of the chapter addresses the issue that might make the most direct case for cynicism – namely, that politicians lie all the time. There is no point in deny-ing that politicians do lie some of the time, but the case for the defence rests on two main points. First, we all lie some of the time. Second, between lying at one end of the spectrum and the full, unvarnished truth at the other, there are many halfway houses that our expectations and the circumstances under which they may operate often force politicians uncomfortably to occupy.

The final section of Chapter 7 examines the role of the mainstream media in promoting a culture of cynicism. There are several aspects of this argu-ment to consider. First, there has been a ‘dumbing down’ in news coverage, which means that people are less likely to understand underlying issues or complexities with respect to politics and politics can often be seen to fail when what it is delivering is judged in a simplistic framework. Second, the fusing of news reporting and comment, which is a characteristic of modern media coverage of politics, probably feeds a culture where fact, opinion and speculation merge into one another and which lends itself to a cynical take on political life. A third argument is that the media in some countries has actively spread a culture of contempt; a fourth argument is that we have seen the emergence of a style of journalism that presents itself as the champion of the people and takes a strongly adversarial position to politicians, asking all the time why is this politician lying to me and you, the viewers and lis-teners. The first two arguments perhaps hold true across more countries than the last two. However, we should stop glorifying journalists and journalism



Introduction 13

that makes its reputation by being constantly cynical about politics and poli-ticians. The problem with cynicism is that it is ultimately a fatalistic creed: it feeds disengagement, because it tells us that in the end selfishness and mendacity will triumph, so why bother?

I am not arguing that you should trust politicians without qualification. I am happy to agree that politicians sometimes make politics worse by their behaviour. Some politicians are dishonest, some are time-serving compro-misers and some are dangerous ideologues. In some senses, in all of these ways they are representative of us, the citizens. But beyond that, many poli-ticians are not as venal, incompetent or divisive as we sometimes think. Democracy needs us to strike a pose of healthy scepticism towards politi-cians, rather than corrosive cynicism.

Chapter 8 looks at another problematic approach to democratic poli-tics that is commonly to be observed in today’s world: populism. Populists are not really troubled by the mood of anti-politics, rather they are trying to exploit it. Populists see themselves as true democrats, defending the neglected interests of the people. Modern populism finds an accommoda-tion with democratic practice and thought and is reflected in the rapid rise of ‘anti-politicians’ of various hues and persuasions: right-wing, left-wing and centrists. It is often reflected in the spectacular rejection of political elite-supported referendum propositions that are put to the people. Modern populism draws in people from all walks of life, not just the uneducated or the underclass. It feeds on the discontent with politics and produces short bursts of engagement, but offers little that could sustain a tolerant and viable approach to politics.

My main criticism of populism is that it fails to see the complexities of politics. Ironically for a creed that holds that the common sense of the people should be lauded, populism tends towards a very high-octane faith in redemptive politics. Changing the world in the direction you want is a matter of capturing the will of the people. Democracy should deliver what the people want, and if it does not it’s down to corrupt politicians or the malign influence of do-gooders, big business or some other unrepresenta-tive lobby. It tends to a view that a powerful personality and strong leader-ship could overcome all the problems and institutional complexities that appear to bedevil the practices of democratic governments. The irony is that common sense might tell you to be more pragmatic and view politics as the art of the possible, a matter of compromise, its tone as driven by respect for toleration and diversity, its rewards as stability and peace rather than any utopia. Populism should not be viewed as simply anti-democratic or undesirable. Populism can express a belief central to democracy – that the people can change their world for the better. It fails when it collapses into




aggressive intolerance of other people’s legitimate viewpoints and gener-ally the rather simplistic understanding of political processes and prospects that it conveys.

Searching for Solutions

The understanding of politics in democracies offered here provides a frame-work for interpreting the sense of disenchantment and divorce from politics that pervades those democracies and simultaneously points towards ways to improve the practice of politics in democracies. We now need to consider what changes are needed, and how positive change could be delivered. This book takes a long, hard look at how people participate in politics. It finds that people are often cynical about politics, that many have naïve aspirations about what it can offer and achieve, that people tend to offload responsibili-ties for engagement and that most prefer to join in themselves only in a way that minimizes effort and maximizes potential gain.

The troubling issue is that these dominant forms of citizen engagement are not sustainable as a way of conducting democratic politics. They feed a cycle of disaffection that ultimately runs the risk of undermining public sup-port for democracy. Rampant cynicism, populism and a stark gap between high-intensity activists and the political practice of the rest of us makes politics more difficult and less likely to succeed. We need to rethink the way that we do politics. It matters for the future of democracy that we do.

In Chapter 9 I argue, however, that we should start from where people are and then seek to mould political institutions and a wider civic infrastructure to enable people to engage in politics more effectively without transforming them into new model citizens. When it comes to politics, most people are amateurs: they have no intention of making it their vocation or career. There is nothing wrong with being an amateur, but there is a difference between a vaguely competent amateur and a completely inadequate layperson – as any golfer, sailor or birdwatcher will tell you. Moreover, being an incompetent amateur when it comes to these leisure activities can be very irritating to others, and occasionally even dangerous. The same argument can be applied when considering democratic politics. So the first plea of this book is that people should be more self-critical and reflective about their approach to politics. They should seek to become more competent amateurs.

Politics is a place for amateurs, but we need to design institutions, struc-ture processes and develop support systems to make it easier for people to engage. My solution to the problem of disenchantment with politics is thus deceptively simple. It is to expand the opportunities for citizens to have a say about the issues they care about. There are two insights hidden away



Introduction 15

in this formula that run as threads throughout this book. First, it is vital to recognize the range of issues that people think are important. One person’s ‘big issue’ can mean nothing to another. This is so because politics rests on a fundamental truth about human beings: because we, and only we, can live our different lives, we all see the world through the lens of that experience. Most of us probably carry around in our heads a set of (usually unarticu-lated) understandings of what range and type of issues matter to us; they will be different to those held by others. We need a politics that allows citizens to have a say over what is important to them, not what professional politicians, lobbyists, journalists or scientists tell them is important. The second is that having a say does not mean, for most people, having a veto or being the final judge. As amateurs, citizens are cautious about claiming decision-taking responsibility. Having a say means wanting to influence, but not having to decide.

The implications of these challenges are taken up in Chapters 10 and 11. Chapter 10 explores how to make representative politics more legitimate and open. Representative politics needs to be understood as a more active exchange between citizen and representative and restructured to give more scope for local and global decision making. We need to learn to love local politics and argue for a world where local political actors – mayors – have both more power and are held to account by a more dynamic community politics. We need to find ways to embrace global politics and get the voices of citizens heard. The EU may be a way of dealing on the global stage for much of Europe but there can be little doubt that it suffers from a demo-cratic deficit.

Chapter 11 looks at the broader civic arena that surrounds politics. It argues for some big changes. The first set of initiatives goes under the broad heading of democratic innovations and is about new ways of offering public engagement in politics. The second set of options rests on a critical use of new social media and other new technologies to do politics differ-ently. The third option explores how citizens can use a range of monitoring and challenging devices to build on their distrust of politics in order to hold politicians and other decision-makers to account. The fourth option is to consider how to improve understanding of politics and goes on to examine the roles of civic education, key civic institutions and in particular the main-stream media in creating a positive environment for democratic politics.



239

Index

accountability 177–8, 199activism

in European nations, level of 91global 115–16grassroots 115positive case for 155–6professionalization of see professionaliza-

tion of activismprotest 104radical 115–16types of 90 see also citizen engagement

activistsfunctions of 104–5political, as minority 11 representative politics, reform chal-

lenges 182–5 see also citizen engagement

Adam Smith Institute 67Advisory Group on Education for

Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools 205

Africa 21, 26, 27political disenchantment in 43

age, voting and 169–70allies, seeking 83amateurs, politics and

activism 155–6citizen engagement 153–5

American National Election Study 36American Political Science

Association 163, 169Amna, Erik 103Amnesty International 109–10antiestablishment parties 140anti-politics

Italy and 45populism and 143

Arab Spring 20, 21, 29, 100Argentina, political disenchantment in 43argument, political 6Asia 21, 26association activity 161asylum-seekers, rights of 31austerity, political disenchantment and 69Australia

compulsory voting in 169digital political engagement and 100

political disenchantment in 37, 47, 64, 69populism in 139reform ideas in, public approval for 212

Austria, Freedom Party in 140authoritarian regimes 20, 24, 26, 28

decline in respect for 58stable 29

authority, decline in respect for 58autocratic regimes 20, 24, 33

Baby Boomers 100Bang, Henrik 58Bangladesh 26Bank of England 60Barber, Benjamin 179bargaining 83Barr, Matt 183–4BBC 129Beetham, David 73behavior

ethical 171–2manipulated 83of politicians, 182–3

BelgiumCitizen’s Assemblies in 193compulsory voting in 169

Bennett, Lance 202Berg-Schlosser, Dirk 29Berlin Wall, fall of 27Berry, Jeffrey 110BIPO/Gallup 37Blair, Tony 126, 135blogs 101, 129, 176Bowler, Shaun 215boycotts 77, 100Bozóki, András 43Brazil 21

Participatory Budgeting in 196–7political disenchantment in 43

Britain see United KingdomBritish Social Attitudes, survey 36Buchanan, James 122–3budget council (COP) 197–8Builders, the, digital political engagement

and 100–1Bush, George 27, 126business, in mass democracies 73business process re-engineering (BPR) 176



240 Index

calculus approach to politics 79campaigning

changing pattern of 112–13electoral reform and 173–4

Canada 31Citizen’s Assemblies in 193political disenchantment 37

Canovan, Margaret 141, 144capacity for engagement 95cartel party 105cause-oriented advocacy groups 112Central and Eastern European (CEE) states

21, 27centralization

political decision making and 82of political power 178

centralized allocation 74–6centrally regulated political system 82–3change, social, political disenchantment

and 51–5chequebook participation 110–12China 24, 29

human rights and 109–10Churchill, Winston 28citizen engagement

atomized citizenship and 98–9CLEAR model of 94–8, 190–3cognitive stumbling blocks to 160–1collectivist/individualistic forms of 92deliberation and 158–60digital politics and 99–102dimensions of engagement 162–4do people want to engage? 160–2education level and 94engagement by generation 101in European countries 91good citizens and 156–8latent forms of 102–3limits to 162localism and 179means of engagement 90–3traditional/contemporary forms of 101uneven capacity to participate 93–8

citizen initiatives, referendums and 198–200

citizen lobby, rise of 109–14campaigning, changing pattern of

112–13chequebook participation, professional

organization and 110–12insiders/outsiders 113–14representation, making more equal? 109–10

citizen(s)deliberative model of democracy and

158–60

digital engagement of 11lobby organizations of 12as political amateurs 151–2 see also

amateurs, politics andpolitical disenchantment of see political

disenchantmentpolitical engagement of 11populism and 138rights of, democracy and 22stealth perspective of 64

Citizen’s Assemblies 193–4citizenship

atomized, quality engagement and 98–9politics as expression of 81

citizenship education 205–8Citizen’s Juries 194CIVICUS (alliance of civil society

organizations) 188civil society 188–89civil wars 6Clarke, Nick 39CLEAR model of citizen engagement

94–8, 190–3asked to 96–7can do 95enabled to 96like to 95–6responded to 97–8

Clegg, Nick 183–4clicktivism 62–4, 203Clougherty, Tom 67cognitive stumbling blocks, to citizen

engagement 160–1co-governance mechanisms 196–8Cold War 21, 32, 155Coleman, Stephen 175collectivist political activism 92communication

conversational democracy, social media and 175–6

dialogue and, as expression of politics 80–1

digital political engagement and 99–102Internet, political change and 202mass democracies, politics and 72, 80policy implementation and 83–4political parties and 106

community, political engagement and 161–2community policing 197complexity, political decision making and

82–3, 177compromise

policy making and 83politics and 4survival and 7



Index 241

compulsory voting 169–70conflicts

diverse society and 6politics and 5

consultative mechanisms, democratize innovation and 190–3

consumer society, political disenchantment, and 55–6

conversational democracy, social media and 175–6

coordinated government, political decision making and 82–3

corruption 171–2counter-democracy 188, 204Crenson, Matthew 99, 156–7Crick, Bernard 7, 32, 55, 78, 205crowdfunding 101cultural approach to politics 79–80culture

changes in, politics and 2of contempt, news media and 12–13politics as inward-looking 61–2

Cunning of Unreason, The (Dunn) 71cyber members, political parties and 106cynicism see political cynicismCzech Republic 93

Dahl, Robert 154Dalton, Russell 48–9debating points 118decentralization of political power 178decentralized mechanisms 73–4decision making

centralized allocation 74–6collective 5, 6, 10complexity/coordination and 82–3democracy as operating system of 22localism and 180market-based allocation and 73–4opaqueness of 66–7

deference, decline of 57–9de Kirchner, Fernández 43deliberative model of democracy 78, 158–60deliberative polling 193–4democracy

academic/theoretical narrative of 154attractive features of 24constructive value of 25as continuous exchange 156conversational, social media and 175–6dark side to 30deliberative model of 78, 158–60economic development 21facts of 25–26mass, successes/disappointments in 9–10

migrants’ rights and 31politics and 3populism and 13, 144–6protest and 114–15religion and 27representation and 165rise of 26–9stealth view of 64suffrage, universal 8support for 28–31top-down view of 177transition to 21as universal value 21–5as Western concept 22see also mass democracies, politics of

democratic governance 20–1democratic innovations

CLEAR model of citizen engagement 190–3

co-governance mechanisms 196–8consultative mechanisms 190–3counter democracy 204encouraging ‘civicness’ 188, 208Internet and 200–4mini-publics 193–6participation initiatives 189–90referendums/citizen initiatives

198–200democratic politics, discontent/disenchant-

ment with 7–8democratic theory, populism and

Dowding’s argument 142–3Riker’s claims 141–2

demonstrationspolitical activism and 92see also movements; protests

Denmark 45–6, 64depoliticization 60de Tocqueville, Alex 51dialogue, communication and 80–1Diamond, Larry 32–3dictatorships 26digitally networked action (DNA) 202digital politics, citizen engagement and

99–102, 106, 200–4Dionne, E. J., Jr. 151disenchantment see political disenchantment

entriesdistributional consequences

84–5do it yourself (DIY) politics 115Donovan, Todd 215Dowding, Keith 142–3Dryzek, John 195Dunn, John 4, 6, 71



242 Index

Eastern Europe 20, 43e-campaign 101economic cycles, political cynicism and 124economic development 21economies

democracy and 29inequality 56–7

educationcitizen, media and 204–8citizen engagement in European countries

162–4globalization and 181political activism and 94

Ekman, Joakim 103elections

competitive, reform and 173–5democratic requirements for 27free/competitive 20see also voting

electoral districts 173electoral units 173–5elitism, of civic activism 113empowered participatory government 159engagement see citizen engagementethical standards, reforms, representation

and 171–2ethnic cleansing 30ethnicity, politics and 6European Commission 182, 200European nations

distrust of politics, 120–1education, citizen engagement and

162–4level of activism in 91populism in 140

European Parliament 182European Social Survey (ESS) 121European Union (EU)

Britain’s Leave campaign (BREXIT) and 1, 198–9, 216–17

dislike of 26as focus of debate 2interest group funding and 112political disenchantment and 45referendums and 200reform, options for 181–2as supranational form 155

Evans, Mark 212exit mechanism 77experts, political participation through

117–19

Facebook 100fast thinking 63fear, political disenchantment and 48–9

Ferguson, Ross 176Fiji 30financial crisis, global 60Financial Times 207Finland

political activism in 93political disenchantment in 45–6populism in 140

Fiorina, Morris 114, 154Fishkin, James 193Five Star Movement, Italy 140Flinders, Matt 55Font, Joan 43Fox, Richard 121–2, 206France 21

National Front party 140political activism in 92, 93political disenchantment in 45–6

freedom of association 154Freedom Part, Austria 140Friends of the Earth (citizen lobby) 12Fung, Archon 159, 160, 189

G7 66–7G8 116G77 67Gallup 38Gamble, Andrew 65gender, representativeness and 171generational political engagement

100–1Generation X 100Generation Y 100genocide 6Gerber, Alan 174Germany

political activism in 93political disenchantment in 45–6

Ghazarian, Zareh 139Ginsberg, Benjamin 99, 156–7Githongo, John 43global activism 115–16global financial crisis 60global governance 181–2globalization 167, 177

impact of, politics and 66political disenchantment and 65–6

Goodin, Bob 163, 195, 213, 214Gore, Al 27governance

democratic, nature of 20–1localism and 178–81machinery of 107

governance approach to political decision making 66



Index 243

governmentempowered participatory 159responsive 137transparency and 167

grassroots activists 115Great Depression 32Greece 21, 26

political activism in 93political disenchantment in 44–5, 64populism in 140

Green, Donald 174Greenpeace 115Griffiths, Barry 176gross domestic product (GDP) 155Grugel, Jean 51

Halupka, Max 203, 211–13Hansard Society, UK 183–4Harding, Isobel 1Hay, Colin 126, 183–4, 211–13Heimans, Jeremy 201Held, David 178Hetherington, Marc 47–8Hibbing, John 89, 160–2, 168, 210Hirschman, Albert 85Hirst, Paul 156Hofer, Norbert 140Hooghe, Marc 47, 122House of Cards (television show) 131Howard, John 126human rights 9, 110, 115Hungary

Fidesz party in 43political activism in 93political disenchantment in 43populism in 140

Huntington, Samuel 23Hussein, Saddam 30, 117, 126Husser, Jason A. 47–8Hutton Inquiry 129

identity politics, protest movements and 117ideology, decline of partisanship or 59–60If Mayors Rules the World (Barber) 179implementation, policy and 83–4inclusiveness 178In Defense of Politics (Crick) 7, 32, 55,

78, 205India 23, 30individualism, mass democracies and 71–2individualist political activism 92inequality, political disenchantment and 56–7influence 83Inglehart, Ronald 58insiders/outsiders, citizen lobby 113–14

institutionsdesign of 164distrust of 121political decision making 66populism and 137

interactivity, social media and 175International Labour Organization (ILO) 66International Monetary Fund (IMF) 123intervention, regulation of 6intrinsic motivation 125Iran 29Iraq 30Iraq War 117, 126, 129Ireland

Citizen’s Assemblies in 193political disenchantment in 42–4

ItalyFive Star Movement in 140political disenchantment in 44–5

Jacobs, Alan 48Jennings, Will 39John, Peter 175Johnson, Boris 1Johnson, Dennis 151journalism

civic, democratic innovations and 206–8culture of contempt and 12–13 see also media

judgment, partiality, politics and 5–6jurisdiction 177

Keane, John 204Kennedy, Helena 56–7Kenya 33, 43Kibaki, Mwai 43Kilroy-Silk, Robert 139Kosovo 30

Lakoff, George 131Laski, Harold 32Latin America 21, 26, 43, 48–9Lawless, Jennifer 121–2, 206leadership, ethics and 172legitimacy, politics and 85–6Le Pen, Marine 140Li, Jinging 212liberalism

democracy and 23populism and 141–42

Liberalism against Populism (Riker) 141–2Lijphart, Arend 169Lindblom, Charles 82, 83listening, politics and 77Lithuania, populism in 140



244 Index

Livingstone, Ken 126Lloyd, John 129, 207lobby, rise of citizen see citizen lobby, rise oflobby organizations, Friends of the Earth 12localism 167, 178–81Logic of Connective Action, The (Bennett &

Segerberg) 202Lowndes, V. 193loyalty, politics and 85–6, 166Luxembourg, political disenchantment in

45–6lying, politicians and 126–8

Macedo, Stephen 173, 174, 206Machiavelli, Niccoló 79, 122, 132machinery of governance 107Mair, Peter 62, 107majoritarian system 173Maloney, William 111Mandela, Nelson 20manipulated behavior 83Mann, Michael 30Marcos, Ferdinand 26Marien, Sofie 47, 122market-based allocation, political decision

making and 73–4marketing, clicktivism and 62–4Martin, Aaron 47Marx, Groucho 120Marx, Karl 120mass democracies, politics of

calculus approach 79centralized allocation 74–6communication, dialogue and 80–1complexity/coordination and 82–3credibility, of political systems 85–6cultural approach to 79–80distributional consequences, decision

making and 84–5exit/voice and 77individualism 71–2market-based allocation 73–4policy, implementation and 83–4politics, in public realm 78–9voice/communication and 72

mass observation (MO) 37, 39, 185Matthews, Scott J. 48Mazzoleni, G. 138media

activists’ reliance on 116–17campaigning, citizen lobby and 113–14civic journalism 206–8digital political engagement and 99–102dumbing down of news coverage 12–13political disenchantment, role of in 62–4

populism and 137–9power, balance of and 204see also social media

media, role of in cynicismcountering criticism 130criticisms of and 128–30

membership lite, political parties 106Merkel, Wolfgang 34Mettler, Suzanne 66Mexico 21Middle East 27migrants, rights of 31mini-publics, democratic innovations and

193–6MO. See mass observationmonitorial citizens 204Moore, Michael 72–3moral accounting, media, political cynicism

and 130–3Moral Politics (Lakoff) 131Moss, Jonathan 39motivations, political 125movements 115Muddle, Cas 62, 134–5, 137–8, 143mud-slinging 183, 185multilevel governance, architecture of

176–82global 181–2localism, case for new 178–81

multispeed membership, political parties and 105–8

mutual adjustment 82–3Mycock, Andy 170

National Council of Voluntary Organisations (UK) 188–9

National Front party, France 140negotiation 83neoliberal perspective 60–1Nepal 26Netherlands 45–6, 215networks, political decision making 66new localism 178–81New Right 123Newton, Ken 187, 195Nigeria 33non-governmental organizations (NGOs)

115No Place for Amateurs (Johnson)

151Nordhaus, Ted 118norms 125Norris, Pippa 34, 48, 57, 206–7North Africa 27Northern Ireland 30



Index 245

Norwaypolitical activism in 93populism in 140special interest groups, political

disenchantment and 64not in my back yard (NIMBY) politics 180

Obama, Barack 201Oborne, Peter 126–8Occupy Movement 100, 201, 203ombudsman services 204One Nation Party, Australia 139outcome failure 65–9

Pakistan 26, 33participation initiatives 189–90Participator Budgeting (PB) 196–7participatory politics 189Participedia 189–90, 197parties, political see political partiespartisanship, decline in political disenchant-

ment and 59–60party politics, as game dominated 62Pattie, Charles 98–9Pew Research Center 36Philippines 26Plotke, David 165–6

Podemos political party, Spain 140Poland 20, 93policy implementation 83–4political activism see citizen engagementpolitical argument 6political capital 161political cynicism

as fatalist creed 133lying, politicians and 126–8media role in 128–30moral accounting, failure of 130–3public choice theory and 122–6public interest, neglect of 124why it matters 120–2

political disenchantmentin Australia 37basement decliners 44–5in Britain 35–6in Canada 37causes of 52–3of citizens 38does it matter? 46–7factors driving 40modest decliners 45–6patterns of 34–5post-war 37reasons for see political disenchantment,

reasons for

social scope, increase in 38–9solution to 186steady decline, countries with 35–41steep decliners 41–4in United States 36words associated with politics 41

political disenchantment, reasons for 51–70

austerity, response to? 69clicktivism 62–4consumer society and 55–6decision making, opaqueness 66–7deference, decline of 57–9different pathways to 69–70inequality 56–7loss of faith 60–1neglecting long-term and big

issues 67–8outcome failure 65–9partisanship, decline of ideology or

59–60professionalization of politics 61–2question of balance 68social capital decline 51–5special interests and 64–5

political engagementdisenchantment and see political disen-

chantmentshould we want engagement? 153–5 see also citizen engagement

political partiesactivism, multispeed membership and

105–7Five Star Movement, Italy 140Freedom Party, Austria 140National Front, France 140One Nation, Australia 139Podemos, Spain 140political disenchantment and 108–9professionalization of 107–8Republican 140UK Independence Party (UKIP) 139Veritas, UK 139

political rights, democracy and 20politician(s)

behavior of 182–3cynicism about 12disenchantment/distrust of 9–10, 37distrust in European countries 120–1distrust in United States 121–2lying and 126–8mud-slinging and 185reform, representative politics and 182–5as social pariahs 1–2what motivates? 38



246 Index

politicscitizens as amateurs 151–2 see also

amateurs, politics andcompeting interests v. limited resources 2digital forms of engagement 11, 99–102discontent/disenchantment with

democratic 7–8, 34–5 see also political disenchantment

disenchantment, solutions to 14–15dissolution with 32do it yourself (DIY) 115dynamics of, negative response to 1–3fears/preconceptions of 3of mass democracies see mass

democracies, politics ofmediatization of 62–4participatory 189pathologies of practice of 10–14populism and lack of respect for 144pragmatic/redemptive 145–6professionalization of 61–2as public discourse 79in public realm, mass democracies and

78–9rational choice/strategic action and 79reactive, populism and 146–7re-engineering representative 176sharp loss of confidence in 42short-termism in 67–8why it matters 5–7why necessary 3–5words associated with 41

population movement 31populism

in action 139–40assessing 143–6character of modern 135–7defining modern 134–5democracy and 13democratic theory and 141–3as politics of anti-politics 143pressure encourages 137–9as reactive politics 146–7Trump, Donald, and 139–40us against them 136

populist platform 136Portugal 21, 26, 30, 42–4post-materialists 58post-truth environment, politicians, lying and

126–8Power Inquiry (UK) 190Power Report (Britain, Kennedy) 56–7power struggles, politics and 6pragmatic politics 145–6Pratchett, L. 193

Pressman, J. 83–4Prince, The (Machiavelli) 79privatization, of key public services 60privileges, special 123–4problem solvers, people as 80problem solving, politics and 81professionalization of activism

defining 105experts, participation through 117–19factors of 111–12lobby, rise of citizen 109–14multispeed membership and 105–7political parties 107–8protest, dissent and 114–15

professionalization of politics 61–2proportional system 173protests, political activism and 92

democracy, and 114–15global activism 115–16limitations, criticisms and 116–17organizations, professionals and 117–19

Przeworski, Adam 73–4public approval, of reforms 209–12public choice theory

criticisms and limitations of 124–6self-serving/selfish motivations 122–4

public discourse, politics as 79public goods, allocation of, centralized

decision making and 76public interest, neglect of, political cynicism

124public opinion 155public realm, politics in 78–9punishment 132Putnam, Robert 53, 54, 161, 188

race discrimination 115rational choice approach to politics 79–80rationality, deliberation and 158reactive politics, populism and 146–7Reagan, Ronald 60, 123reciprocation 132redemptive politics 145–6re-engineering representative politics 176referendums, citizen initiatives and 198–200reform(s)

challenges of 215–16competitive elections 173–5conversational democracy, social media

and 175–6ethical standards, transparency and 171–2maintaining ethical standards 171–2prospects for 213–14re-engineering representative politics 176representativeness challenge 176



Index 247

social representativeness 171UK/EU Leave referendum (BREXIT)

216–17unconventional 175–6which have public approval? 209–12who should lead? 215

refugees, rights of 31regulation, of interventions 6religion

democracy and 27social capital decline and 54

rent-seeking behavior 124representation, lobby groups and 109–10representation, making better

architecture of multigovernance 176–82compulsory voting 169effectiveness, importance of 165–7incentives, stimulate voting 170lowering voting age 169–70more transparency for reforms that fail

168–9unconventional reforms 175–6

representative politics 156challenge for politicians/activists 182–5re-engineering 176

Republican Party, U.S. 140research, public choice theory and 125resilience 86responsibility, taking 132responsive government 137restitution 132Riggirozzi, Pia 43rights see human rights; political rightsRiker, William 141–2Rise of Political Lying, The (Oborne) 126–8Rosanvillion, Pierre 204Russell, Meg 56, 129Russia 29, 33Rwanda 30

Saward, Michael 154Scarrow, Susan 106, 108Scholte, Jan Aart 115–16Schumpter, Joseph 154Scotland, Citizen’s Juries in 194Segerberg, Alexandra 202self-interests, public choice theory and 124–6Sen, Amartya 19, 23–4Seyd, Patrick 104Shaw, Martin 117Shellenberger, Michael 118short-termism, in politics 67–8short-term maximizers 125Shucker, Gavin 1single-member plurality system 173

Skocpol, Theda 111–12, 114Slovakia, populism in 140Slovenia, political activism in 93slow thinking 63Smith, Graham 190, 197social capital decline 51–5social identification 125social media

conversational democracy through 175–6

digital political engagement 100–1, 106political impact of, change and 200–4see also media

social movement, network-driven 115social problems, democracy and 155social representativeness 171society

conflict in diverse 6consumer, political disenchantment and

55–6individualistic 2politics and 4

Somalia 24Sørensen, Eva 58Soros, George 116South Africa 20, 22, 30–1South Korea 21, 26Soviet Union (FSU) 21, 24, 27Spacey, Kevin 131Spain 21, 26

Podemos party 140political activism in 92–3political disenchantment in 42–4

special interestspolitical cynicism and 124political disenchantment and 64–5

specialization, demands of 112Sri Lanka 30stealth perspective, of citizenship 64Stoker, Gerry 39, 193, 211–12strategic action, mass democracies and 79street-level bureaucrats 83–4suffrage, universal, democracy and 8, 20sunshine laws 168–9 see also transparencysurveys

public opinion 27–8World Values 28, 31

Swedenpolitical activism in 93political disenchantment in 45–6

Switzerlandcitizen-sponsored referendums in 199–200populism in 140special interests, political disenchantment

and 64



248 Index

System 1 thinking 63System 2 thinking 63

Taiwan 21, 26Taylor, Marilyn 117technology, digital political engagement

and 99–102, 200–4Thailand 33Thatcher, Margaret 60, 123Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth 89, 160–2, 168,

210theocracy 29Thompson, Emma 121Timms, Henry 201Tonge, Jon 170trade unions, social capital decline and 54transparency 167

reform, representative and 171–2sunshine laws 168–9

transplanetary solidarity 116trial membership, in political parties 106Trump, Donald 1, 136, 139–40trust

citizen engagement and 95lack of, political engagement and 47–8localism and 179measuring public 35 see also political

disenchantmentin politicians, in European countries 120–1

truth, lying politicians and 126–8Twitter 100

UNESCO 66United Kingdom 21

Amnesty International in 109–10anti-politics in 182austerity, political disenchantment and

69Citizen’s Assemblies in 193citizenship education in 205–6compulsory voting and 169electoral system, reform to 174Independence Party 139leave/stay referendum EU (Brexit) 1,

198–9, 216–17level of political activity in 90–1political activism in 93political disenchantment in 35–6, 39–40,

69–70

populism in 139Power Report 56–7public approval for reform ideas, 211–12special interests and 64

United Nations 60United States

citizenship education in 206democracy and risk 163distrust of politicians and 121–2downsized democracy 156–7political disenchantment in 36special interests and 64

value-based reasons, for digital political engagement 100

valuesclash of 21–5constructive 25openness 156, 172postmodern 58

Veritas Party, UK 139Vietnam War 32voice, mass democracies, politics of and

72, 77voting

incentives to stimulate 170lower age to 169–70 make compulsory? 167, 169–70see also elections

Wall Street 100, 201Walter, Jim 139Walzer, Michael 131Warren, Mark 166, 189Washington Post 151Webb, Paul 108Weber, Max 8weighting system, budgeting and 197–8Welzel, Christian 28Whiteley, Paul 69, 104white lies 127WHO 66Wildavsky, A. 83–4World Bank 22, 60, 66, 116, 123World Values Survey 28, 31World War II 32, 100, 183Wright, Erik Olin 159, 160

Yugoslavia (FYR) 30



List of Tables and Figures Preface to the Second Edition · politics persists only because humans make the wrong choices: if they fol-: . politics of mass democracies . religion,

Documents