Page 209 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

Globalization and Democracy 195

In normative terms, democracy may be formal or substantive. Defi nitions
of democracy as formal – which prevail in political science – concern the
procedures by which governments are made accountable and legitimate.

Joseph Schumpter ’ s definition of democracy as exclusively concerned with
competition between political parties to win votes is such a defi nition
(Mair, 2008 : 113). Wider considerations of procedural democracy also
concern questions such as: the methods by which candidates are selected
within parties; the independence of legislatures from corruption; separa-
tion of powers between the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive;
and so on. Substantive democracy is much harder to pin down since it
involves judgments about the quality and the extent of popular participa-
tion in democratic decision - making: “ rule by the people ” should ensure
the equality of all voices in society; all should be properly represented, and
all should be heard. Thinking about democracy substantively involves
asking questions about whether “ the people ” have really been represented
in government. One of the main ways to assess this is to consider the
outcome of democratic deliberations: do some people systematically benefi t
from democratic procedures, while others systematically lose? Such ques-
tions are tricky because it is difficult to agree on what the outcome of

democratic decision - making would be if it were not distorted; inevitably,
they raise further questions about what an undistorted outcome should
be. In this respect, analyses of substantive democracy link up with issues
of citizenship explored in chapter 4 . At the very least, governments should
act in the interests of “ ordinary ” people, many of whom might reasonably
be expected to rely on public provision of education, healthcare, and social
insurance against illness, unemployment, and old - age at different points
in their lives. In this respect, something like Marshall ’ s model of citizenship
provides a rough guide to expected outcomes. As we also saw in chapter
4 , however, in a pluralist society, different outcomes are required for the
equality of different groups of “ ordinary ” people, whilst the problem of
how to balance equality and freedom is always controversial, as it is for
social movements involved in extending the equality and diversity of citi-
zenship rights. Although the distinction between procedural and substan-
tive democracy may seem relatively straightforward, and procedural
questions much easier to assess, in practice things are not so clear - cut.
Questions of both procedural and substantive democracy are almost
always involved in judging whether particular procedures are actually
democratic, where they result in outcomes that are skewed towards par-

ticular perspectives and definitions of the “ common good. ”
In section 5.1 , we first look at what most people consider the defi ning

procedures of representative democracy, multi - party electoral politics. It