Select Page

Essay on Dahl and Democracy

6-7 page essay on one of these topics: 1.  In Democracy and its Critics, Dahl claims that his “right to self-government by means of a democratic process” (and its five characteristics) can be reconciled with a modern polyarhchical democracy with representative institutions, multiple centers of power, and a large electorate occupying a large territory. Would you argue that he has accomplished this in his account of modern democracies in ch 15 or has he demonstrated that there is a constant tension between his account of a democratic decision-making process and modern democracies? Focusing on one of the three approaches to extending democracy, Walzer on workplace democracy, Habermas on the public sphere, or Hirschman’s account of activist political engagement, critically assess whether they help overcome the Dahl problem of aligning political equality with modern democracy or show the tension to be chronic. 2. “The problem with Dahl’s five-part account of political equality is that while it seeks to find an institutional answer to the tension between large-scale democracies and the principle of political equality it demonstrates that such an answer is not to be found.  In fact, we should follow Hirschman’s approach in Shifting Involvements and look for democracy in the recurrent cycles of political activism and protest. It is here we find moments of political equality.”  Critically discuss this claim laying out the two positions.  Which side would you agree with and why? 3.  “The problem with Dahl’s attempt to reform democracy through his proposals in ch 23 to reduce inequalities of wealth and income, introduce workplace democracy, and bring policy expertise under control is that he has not addressed the problem that Habermas raises: how to recover an active public sphere. Political equality without an active public sphere of the kind Habermas argues for will prove to be merely formal.”  Critically assess this statement.  Is Habermas’s public sphere and Dahl’s argument for a democratic decision-making process in tension or complementary? 4.  “Dahl in chapter 23 of Democracy and its Critics and Walzer in “Property/Power” are right. If we subscribe to democracy in a state or a city, we must have democracy in the economic firm.  Otherwise, we are in danger of living much of our lives under authoritarian rule.” Critically assess this claim giving special attention to the reasons why Dahl and Walzer argue for workplace democracy.  Does the claim that workplace democracy interferes with capitalism mean that capitalism should take priority over democracy or the reverse? Some tips on writing your paper: 1.  Make sure to let your reader know from the beginning what the problem is that you are addressing and what you will be arguing!   2. If the theorist you are discussing makes a particularly controversial or debatable claim, or alternatively, a claim on which the whole theory depends make sure you provide evidence from the text.  Sometimes, by focusing on a well-chosen quote, you can reveal a fundamental insight or fundamental flaw in the argument at hand. 3. You must provide proper citations.  Summaries of the arguments without citations will be given a lower grade (since we only have three texts you may cite just the author and page number). 4. In structuring your discussion, you may concentrate more heavily on one of the three theorists where questions call on you to discuss all three, but make sure you lay out the major arguments of the other two.