EL CONCEPTO DE DEMOCRACIA: UN ANÁLISIS MULTIDIMENSIONAL

Diego Mauricio Hernández

doi:10.14210/nej.v26n2.p619-643

Autores

Diego Mauricio Hernández Docente de la Universidad de la Costa, Colombia.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14210/nej.v26n2.p619-643

Palavras-chave:

Democracy, Political representation, Accountability, Political publicity, Democratic responsiveness, Social justice.

Resumo

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.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/700936

Albertus, M and Menaldo, V, 2012, “Coercive Capacity and the Prospects for Democratisation”, Comparative DOI: https://doi.org/10.5129/001041512798838003

Politics 44 (2). pp 151–169.

Anderson, Elizabeth, 2006, “The Epistemology of Democracy”, Episteme, 3(1–2): 8–22. doi:10.3366/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2006.3.1-2.8

epi.2006.3.1-2.8

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 DOI: https://doi.org/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, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139052313

–1850, Cambridge University Press.

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

Beitz, Charles R., 1989, Political Equality: An Essay on Democratic Theory, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691221410

Press

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 DOI: https://doi.org/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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-006-9015-9

Brownlee, 2012, Conscience and Conviction: The Case for Civil Disobedience, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199592944.001.0001

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

doi:10.1007/s11158-004-2326-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-004-2326-6

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

Press

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 DOI: https://doi.org/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.

doi:10.1111/j.1088-4963.2011.01204.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2011.01204.x

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/

democracy/>.

Cohen, Joshua, 1996 [2003], “Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy”, in Democracy and DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691234168-006

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

Press, 95–119; reprinted in Christiano 2003: 17–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1309/C97C7EY00KRQWYVT

Cohen, Joshua, 1986, “An Epistemic Conception of Democracy”, Ethics, 97(1): 26–38. doi:10.1086/292815 DOI: https://doi.org/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 DOI: https://doi.org/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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511510021

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv102bj77

Press.

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

–276. doi:10.5840/schoolman199774424 DOI: https://doi.org/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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195094398.001.0001

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 DOI: https://doi.org/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 DOI: https://doi.org/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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1957401

Habermas, Jürgen, 1996, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1564.001.0001

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12624

Hong, Lu and Scott E. Page, 2004, “Groups of Diverse Problem Solvers Can Outperform Groups of High-Ability DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0403723101

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

pnas.0403723101

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691214429

Societies (43), Princeton University Press.

Kelsen, H., 1955, Ethics, Vol. 66, No. 1, Part 2: Foundations of Democracy (October , 1955), pp. 1–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/291036

Kimber, R., 1989. “On Democracy”. Scandinavian Political Studies 12 (3): 201, 199–219. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.1989.tb00090.x

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2111584

Landemore, Hélène, 2013, Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many, DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691155654.001.0001

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

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

netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/gettysburg.htm.

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 DOI: https://doi.org/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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1522/030175068

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691227887

University Press.

Page, Scott E., 2007, The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400830282

Societies, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Pinker, S., 1994, The Language Instinct: The New Science of Language and Mind, Penguin. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/e412952005-009

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 DOI: https://doi.org/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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198253457.001.0001

Reveles Vázquez, 2017, Democracia participativa para el fortalecimiento de la representación política. La DOI: https://doi.org/10.29092/uacm.v14i35.572

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00129

Sen, Amartya, 1999, “Democracy as a Universal Value”, Journal of Democracy 10 (3) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1999.0055

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 DOI: https://doi.org/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–

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00365.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00365.x

Stilz, Anna, 2009, Liberal Loyalty: Freedom, Obligation, and the State, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400830701

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1090/noti1163

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591795023004001

Waldron, Jeremy, 1999, Law and Disagreement, Oxford: Clarendon Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198262138.001.0001

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511558344

Wright, Gavin, 2013, Sharing the Prize: The Economics of the Civil Rights Revolution in the American South, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9v9z

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press