• Resumo


    Data de publicação: 24/08/2021
    This article starts with the semantic decomposition of the phrase demokratos, which states a subordination of “kratos” (government) to “demos” (people), and analyzes the concept of democracy from a multi-dimensional key. In order to elaborate on the concept of democracy, an analytical distinction was established around three dimensions of government subordination to the people: democracy is understood as (i) the government of the people, (ii) the government by the people, and (iii) the government for the people or the government that serves the people. This kind of analysis can establish a good state of art for contemporary discussions on democratic theory, and determine the main ways to improve the existing democratic government systems.
  • Referências

    ACE, 2014, “Proportional Representation (PR)”. ACE Electoral Knowledge Network. Retrieved 9 April 2014.

    Acemoglu, Daron; Suresh Naidu, Pascual Restrepo and James A. Robinson, 2019, “Democracy Does Cause

    Growth”, Journal of Political Economy, 127(1): 47–100. doi:10.1086/700936

    Albertus, M and Menaldo, V, 2012, “Coercive Capacity and the Prospects for Democratisation”, Comparative

    Politics 44 (2). pp 151–169.

    Anderson, Elizabeth, 2006, “The Epistemology of Democracy”, Episteme, 3(1–2): 8–22. doi:10.3366/


    Arellano, 2015, Mecanismos de democracia directa en América Latina. México. En Contexto (50). CESOPCámara de Diputados

    Bajaj, Sameer, 2014, “Review of Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many,

    by Hélène Landemore”, Ethics, 124(2): 426–431. doi:10.1086/673507

    Barak, A, 2006, The Judge in a Democracy, Princeton University Press.

    Barry, Brian, 1965, Political Argument, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul

    Becker, P, Heideking, J, & Henretta, J., 2002, Republicanism and Liberalism in America and the German States,

    –1850, Cambridge University Press.

    Bedau, Hugo A., 1961, “On Civil Disobedience”, Journal of Philosophy, 58(21): 653–665. doi:10.2307/2023542

    Beitz, Charles R., 1989, Political Equality: An Essay on Democratic Theory, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University


    Birch, A.,1993, The Concepts and Theories of Modern Democracy, Routledge.

    Black, Duncan, 1963, The Theory of Committees and Elections, second edition, Cambridge: Cambridge

    University Press

    Brennan, Jason, 2014, “How Smart Is Democracy? You Can’t Answer That Question a Priori”, Critical Review,

    (1–2): 33–58. doi:10.1080/08913811.2014.907040

    Brownlee, 2007, “The Communicative Aspects of Civil Disobedience and Lawful Punishment”, Criminal Law and

    Philosophy, 1(2): 179–192. doi:10.1007/s11572-006-9015-9

    Brownlee, 2012, Conscience and Conviction: The Case for Civil Disobedience, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Brownlee, Kimberley, 2004, “Features of a Paradigm Case of Civil Disobedience”, Res Publica, 10(4): 337–351.


    Cassese, Antonio, 1995, Self-Determination of Peoples: A Legal Reappraisal, Cambridge: Cambridge University


    Christiano, Thomas, 1996, The Rule of the Many: Fundamental Issues in Democratic Theory, Boulder, CO:

    Westview Press.

    Christiano, Thomas, 1996, The Rule of the Many: Fundamental Issues in Democratic Theory, Boulder, CO:

    Westview Press.

    Christiano, Thomas, 2008, The Constitution of Equality: Democratic Authority and Its Limits, Oxford: Oxford

    University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198297475.001.0001

    Christiano, Thomas, 2011, “An Instrumental Argument for a Human Right to Democracy: An

    Instrumental Argument for a Human Right to Democracy”, Philosophy & Public Affairs, 39(2): 142–176.


    Christiano, Tom and Sameer Bajaj, (2021), “Democracy”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021

    Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/


    Cohen, Joshua, 1996 [2003], “Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy”, in Democracy and

    Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, Seyla Benhabib (ed.), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University

    Press, 95–119; reprinted in Christiano 2003: 17–38.

    Cohen, Joshua, 1986, “An Epistemic Conception of Democracy”, Ethics, 97(1): 26–38. doi:10.1086/292815

    Condorcet, Marquis de, 1785, Essai sur l’application de l’analyse à la probabilité des décisions rendues àla pluralité

    des voix, Paris; reprinted Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139923972

    Crouze, Ivan, 2014, Democratic innovations: reshaping public governance? The journal of field actions, Field

    Actions Science Reports, Special Issue 11, october 2014

    Dahl, R., 1991, Democracy and its Critics, Yale University Press.

    Davenport, Ch., 2007, State Repression and the Domestic Democratic Peace, Cambridge University Press.

    Elster, Jon, 1986 [2003], “The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory”, in Foundations of

    Scoial Choice Theory, Jon Elster and Aanund Hyllund (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 103–132.

    —————, 1998, Deliberative Democracy, Cambridge University Press.

    Ely, John Hart, 1980, Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University


    Estlund, David, 1997, “The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority”:, The Modern Schoolman, 74(4):

    –276. doi:10.5840/schoolman199774424

    —————, 2008, Democratic Authority: A Philosophical Framework, Princeton: Princeton University Press

    Everdell, W., 2000, The End of Kings: A History of Republics and Republicans. University of Chicago Press.

    Gaus, Gerald F., 1996, Justificatory Liberalism: An Essay on Epistemology and Political Theory, New York: Oxford

    University Press.

    Gaus, Gerald F., 2011, The Order of Public Reason: A Theory of Freedom and Morality in a Diverse and Bounded

    World, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511780844

    Giddens, A., 1984, The Constitution of Society, Cambridge Polity Press.

    Goodin, Robert E. and Kai Spiekermann, 2019, An Epistemic Theory of Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University

    Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198823452.001.0001

    Gould, Carol C., 1988, Rethinking Democracy: Freedom and Social Cooperation in Politics, Economics and

    Society, New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Grofman, Bernard and Scott L. Feld, 1988, “Rousseau’s General Will: A Condorcetian Perspective”, American

    Political Science Review, 82(2): 567–576. doi:10.2307/1957401

    Habermas, Jürgen, 1996, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy,

    William Rehg (trans.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996

    Haldane, R., 1918, The future of democracy, Headley Bros. Publishers Ltd.

    Hannon, Michael, 2020, “Empathetic Understanding and Deliberative Democracy”, Philosophy and

    Phenomenological Research, 101(3): 591–611. doi:10.1111/phpr.12624

    Hong, Lu and Scott E. Page, 2004, “Groups of Diverse Problem Solvers Can Outperform Groups of High-Ability

    Problem Solvers”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(46): 16385–16389. doi:10.1073/


    IDEA, 2005, “Electoral System Design: the New International IDEA Handbook”. International Institute for

    Democracy and Electoral Assistance. 2005. Retrieved 9 April 2014.

    Inglehart, R., 1997, “Modernisation and Postmodernisation. Cultural, Economic, and Political Change”, in

    Societies (43), Princeton University Press.

    Kelsen, H., 1955, Ethics, Vol. 66, No. 1, Part 2: Foundations of Democracy (October , 1955), pp. 1–101.

    Kimber, R., 1989. “On Democracy”. Scandinavian Political Studies 12 (3): 201, 199–219.

    Ladha, Krishna K., 1992, “The Condorcet Jury Theorem, Free Speech, and Correlated Votes”, American Journal

    of Political Science, 36(3): 617–634. doi:10.2307/2111584

    Landemore, Hélène, 2013, Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many,

    Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Lincoln, A., 1864, The Gettysburg Address, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, November 19, 1864, http://showcase.


    List, Christian and Robert E. Goodin, 2001, “Epistemic Democracy: Generalizing the Condorcet Jury Theorem”,

    Journal of Political Philosophy, 9(3): 277–306. doi:10.1111/1467-9760.00128

    Locke, John, 1690, Second Treatise on Civil Government, London; reprinted C.B. MacPherson (ed.), Indianapolis,

    IN: Hackett, 1980.

    Lowenstein, K., 1959, Verfassungslehre, Tubingen.

    Macpherson, C., 1977, The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy, Oxford University Press.

    Markovits, Daniel, 2005, “Democratic Disobedience”, Yale Law Journal, 114(8): 1897–1952.

    Marx, K., 2010, «Critique du droit politique hégélien», Allia, Paris.

    Mill, John Stuart, 1861 [1991], Considerations on Representative Government, London: Parker, Son, and Bourn;

    reprinted Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1991

    Mill, John Stuart, 1861 [1991], Considerations on Representative Government, London: Parker, Son, and Bourn;

    reprinted Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1991

    Ober, J and Hedrick, C., 1996, DÄ“mokratia: a conversation on democracies, ancient and modern, Princeton

    University Press.

    Page, Scott E., 2007, The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and

    Societies, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Pinker, S., 1994, The Language Instinct: The New Science of Language and Mind, Penguin.

    Pinker, S., 2007, The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature, Penguin.

    Pitkin, Hanna Fenichel, 1967, The Concept of Representation, Berkeley, CA: University of California.

    Quirk, Paul J., 2014, “Making It up on Volume: Are Larger Groups Really Smarter?”, Critical Review, 26(1–2):

    –150. doi:10.1080/08913811.2014.907046

    Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Raz, Joseph, 1979, The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Reveles Vázquez, 2017, Democracia participativa para el fortalecimiento de la representación política. La

    experiencia latinoamericana, Andamios vol.14 no.35 México sep./dic. 2017

    Riker, William H., 1982, Liberalism Against Populism: A Confrontation Between the Theory of Democracy and

    the Theory of Social Choice, San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.

    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1762, Du contrat social; ou Principes du droit politique, Amsterdam. Translated as The

    Social Contract, Charles Frankel (trans.), New York: Hafner Publishing Co., 1947.

    Sabl, Andrew, 2001, “Looking Forward to Justice: Rawlsian Civil Disobedience and Its Non-Rawlsian Lessons”,

    Journal of Political Philosophy, 9(3): 307–330. doi:10.1111/1467-9760.00129

    Sen, Amartya, 1999, “Democracy as a Universal Value”, Journal of Democracy 10 (3)

    Sen, Amartya, 1999, Development as Freedom, New York: Knopf.

    Simmons, 2007, Political Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Simmons, A. John, 2001, Justification and Legitimacy: Essays on Rights and Obligations, Cambridge: Cambridge

    University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511625152

    Singer, Peter, 1973, Democracy and Disobedience, Oxford: Clarendon Press

    Smith, William, 2011, “Civil Disobedience and the Public Sphere”, Journal of Political Philosophy, 19(2): 145–


    Stilz, Anna, 2009, Liberal Loyalty: Freedom, Obligation, and the State, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    The economist, 2013, “Democracy index 2012: Democracy at a standstill”. Economist Intelligence Unit. 14

    March 2013.

    Thompson, Abigail, 2014, “Does Diversity Trump Ability?” Notices of the AMS, 61(9): 1024–1030.

    Van Parijs, Ph., 2011, Just Democracy. The Rawls-Machiavelli program, Ecpr Press, Colchester.

    Waldron, Jeremy, 1995, “The Wisdom of the Multitude: Some Reflections on Book 3, Chapter 11 of Aristotle’s

    Politics”, Political Theory, 23(4): 563–584. doi:10.1177/0090591795023004001

    Waldron, Jeremy, 1999, Law and Disagreement, Oxford: Clarendon Press

    Willard, Ch (1996), Liberalism and the Problem of Knowledge: A New Rhetoric for Modern Democracy,

    University of Chicago Press.

    Wood, E (1995), Democracy Against Capitalism: Renewing historical materialism, Cambridge University Press.

    Wright, Gavin, 2013, Sharing the Prize: The Economics of the Civil Rights Revolution in the American South,

    Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Novos Estudos Jurí­dicos

A revista Novos Estudo Jurídicos (NEJ), Qualis A1 Direito, é um periódico científico quadrimestral, com publicações ininterruptas desde 1995, nos meses de Abril, Agosto e Dezembro. Sua missão é promover o aprimoramento dos estudos na área do Direito, especialmente nas seguintes linhas: “Constitucionalismo e Produção do Direito”, “Direito, Jurisdição e Inteligência Artificial” e “Direito Ambiental, Transnacionalidade e Sustentabilidade”.

A NEJ é um dos periódicos científicos da Universidade do Vale do Itajaí (UNIVALI) e está vinculado ao Programa de Pós-Graduação Stricto Sensu em Ciência Jurídica da UNIVALI (conceito CAPES 6), cursos de Mestrado e Doutorado.

O periódico oferece acesso livre e imediato ao seu conteúdo, seguindo o princípio de que disponibilizar gratuitamente o conhecimento científico ao público proporciona maior democratização mundial do conhecimento. 

A visão da revista Novos Estudo Jurídicos (NEJ) consiste na publicação de artigos e relatos de pesquisas inéditos de autoria de docentes, discentes e pesquisadores, estimulando os debates críticos e éticos sobre assuntos relacionados aos temas que compõem sua Linha Editorial.

Access journal