It has been widely argued for over 40 years that modern representative democracies are ‘disaffected’ or in crisis. In the same period the number of countries recognised as being democracies has grown substantially. The core set text for this module (Norris, 2011) is a highly regarded challenge to the ‘disaffected democracies’ literature rooted in one of the most thorough, recent empirical investigations of contemporary democracies. The module builds on this text to examine the sources of the perceptions, and realities, of the ‘democratic malaise’: the public itself, parties, the media, democratic structures and the outcomes, or performance of democratic governments. It encourages students to view themselves as participants in contemporary debates as affected by, for example, the current financial crisis, by including web-based research in their essays whilst maintaining rigorous scholarly and critical standards.

Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of:

• the alleged differences between majoritarian and consensual democracies
• different models of democracy, understood as rooted in specific historical contexts
• the role of parties and party systems in shaping developments in democracy
• the roles of the public, the media, democratic institutions and government performance in shaping attitudes to democracy.

Teaching will be by lecture, seminar and feedback on assessed course work.

Lectures will provide students with introductory overviews of, variously: some key understandings of modern democracy;  key arguments about the role of the public, parties, party systems, the media, democratic institutions and government performance in shaping attitudes to democracy.

Seminars will provide students with the opportunity to ensure they have understood key issues and concepts by considering their persuasiveness in explaining key aspects of contemporary democratic malaise.

Course-work feedback will enable students to gauge their progress during the module in terms both of the substantive issues raised and in terms of relative, summative performance.

Academic and employability skills:

• Reading: in terms of the ability critically to assimilate new arguments and empirical data; that is, higher level ‘comprehension’.
• Writing: understood as a purposive craft whose relevant format is ‘exposition’ designed to demonstrate the ability to apply analytical skills in order to construct persuasive argument (as per Dunleavy, 1986).
• Reflexivity: awareness of the significance of arguments and evidence deployed in oral and written discussion and argument.

Essay (30%)
Essay (70%)

• Democracies: disaffected, in crisis, changing, consolidating?
• Types of democracy: consociational, consensusand majoritarian democracy
• Democracies in history: from Athenian and representative democracy, to post-democracy and de-democratisation?
• Representative democracy: an inferior version of the ‘real thing’?
• Participation: crisis or differentiation? The public and its demands.
• Political Parties: in crisis? Or innovating – dangerously?
• The media and academia: irresponsible myth-makers?
• Populism: degenerative pathology or ambiguous vehicle of democratic rejuvenation?
• Party systems: the foundation of contemporary democratic government? From representation to competition for government.

Core text:

Norris, P. (2011). Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Examples of on-line sites to use:

http://www.freedomhouse.org/ NB its “standard-setting comparative assessment of global political rights and civil liberties” at:

http://www.freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world - and the accompanying documentation (in PDF & Excel formats)

http://www.newleftproject.org/ e.g.:

Hind, D. (2012). Common Sense. Occupation, Assembly and the Future of Liberty, New Left Project

www.OpenDemocracy.net e.g.:

Kurki, M. (2012). Democracy promotion and crisis of democracy in the West

Leys, C. (2011): The Health and Social Care Bill [UK] and the Negation of Democracy

Yee, A. (2010). Crisis of Democracy

http://www.transparency.org/e.g.:

Transparency International Ireland (2009). National Integrity Systems. Transparency International Country Study Ireland 2009.

Other texts:

Diamond, L., & M. F. Plattner (eds), The Global Divergence of Democracies, London, Johns Hopkins UP.

Ewing, J. (2012). Deep Crisis of Confidence Afflicts Democracies, Elsewhere Unease, International Herald Tribune, 25 January.

Gallagher, M., M. Laver & P. Mair (2011). Representative Government in Modern Europe,

Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries, Yale University Press

Mair, P. (1990) (ed). The West European Party System, Oxford, OUP.

Ramadan, T.  (2011) Democracies in Crisis, aval. at: http://www.tariqramadan.com/Democracies-in-crisis,11782.html

Runciman, D. (2012). Will we be all right in the end?, London Review of Books, 5 January. Aval. on line via google search.

Sen, A. (1999). Democracy as a Universal Value, Journal of Democracy, 10, 3: 3-17. Aval. on line via google search for Sen + article title .

Sen, A. (2003). Why Democratization is not the same as Westernization. Democracy and its Global Roots, aval. at: http://hdrnet.org/462/

Sen, A. (2011). It isn't just the euro. Europe's democracy itself is at stake, The Guardian, 22 June

an.com/Democracies-in-crisis,11782.html

Runciman, D. (2012). Will we be all right in the end?, London Review of Books, 5 January. Aval. on line via google search.

Sen, A. (1999). Democracy as a Universal Value, Journal of Democracy, 10, 3: 3-17. Aval. on line via google search for Sen + article title .

Sen, A. (2003). Why Democratization is not the same as Westernization. Democracy and its Global Roots, aval. at: http://hdrnet.org/462/

Sen, A. (2011). It isn't just the euro. Europe's democracy itself is at stake, The Guardian, 22 June