Models for Democracy

Abstract

Democracy can be conceptualized in different ways. Tilly (2007: 7) distinguishes between no less than four ways to define democracy: constitutional, substantive, procedural, and process-oriented. These four ways to approach our subject essentially boil down to two, however: process-oriented (procedural, constitutional) vs. substantive. In his Gettysburg address, Lincoln famously spoke of ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people’.¹ His short phrase encapsulates the essence of the different theoretical perspectives of the democratic process. ‘Government of the people’ and ‘government by the people’ refer to process, ‘government for the people’ refers to substance. Scharpf (1970, 1999a: 6–20) makes the same point by distinguishing between input- and output-oriented democratic thought. From the input-oriented perspective, political decisions are legitimate because they reflect the ‘will of the people’. From the output-oriented perspective, they are legitimate because they effectively promote the common welfare of the people.