深化还是危及民主?代议制政府下的示威与制度

IF 4 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Perspectives on Politics Pub Date : 2024-01-02 DOI:10.1017/s1537592723002955
Robert M. Fishman
{"title":"深化还是危及民主?代议制政府下的示威与制度","authors":"Robert M. Fishman","doi":"10.1017/s1537592723002955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Do demonstrations tend to deepen or endanger democracy? I examine this theme of major debate between scholars and among political actors, analyzing how the United States and other democracies have dealt with—and been shaped by—popular pressure on representative institutions. Cases that are discussed include Martin Luther King’s 1963 March on Washington and the January 6, 2021 assault on the Capitol, as well as examples drawn from Spain, Portugal, and Italy. I offer clear principles to differentiate between types of protest that deepen democracy, advance the goal of inclusion, and others that endanger democratic principles. Among the issues I take up is whether the location of protest—for example, adjacent to or even inside legislative chambers—is decisive. Rejecting that approach, my argument instead emphasizes the difference between protests intended to influence policy-making or the political agenda and those that use intimidation or violence to replace the primacy of elections in selecting office holders. The discussion argues that conceptualizing demonstrations as complementary to the work of representative institutions can help to promote the difficult to obtain objective of political equality between citizens. The article also asks whether consensus on this matter can be attained and if so how.","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deepening or Endangering Democracy: Demonstrations and Institutions under Representative Government\",\"authors\":\"Robert M. Fishman\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1537592723002955\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Do demonstrations tend to deepen or endanger democracy? I examine this theme of major debate between scholars and among political actors, analyzing how the United States and other democracies have dealt with—and been shaped by—popular pressure on representative institutions. Cases that are discussed include Martin Luther King’s 1963 March on Washington and the January 6, 2021 assault on the Capitol, as well as examples drawn from Spain, Portugal, and Italy. I offer clear principles to differentiate between types of protest that deepen democracy, advance the goal of inclusion, and others that endanger democratic principles. Among the issues I take up is whether the location of protest—for example, adjacent to or even inside legislative chambers—is decisive. Rejecting that approach, my argument instead emphasizes the difference between protests intended to influence policy-making or the political agenda and those that use intimidation or violence to replace the primacy of elections in selecting office holders. The discussion argues that conceptualizing demonstrations as complementary to the work of representative institutions can help to promote the difficult to obtain objective of political equality between citizens. The article also asks whether consensus on this matter can be attained and if so how.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives on Politics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives on Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592723002955\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592723002955","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

示威是倾向于深化民主还是危及民主?我将探讨学者之间和政治参与者之间的这一重大争论主题,分析美国和其他民主国家如何应对民众对代议制机构施加的压力,以及这种压力对代议制机构的影响。讨论的案例包括马丁-路德-金 1963 年的华盛顿大游行和 2021 年 1 月 6 日对国会大厦的袭击,以及西班牙、葡萄牙和意大利的例子。我提出了明确的原则来区分深化民主、推进包容目标的抗议类型和危及民主原则的其他类型。我所讨论的问题之一是抗议的地点--例如在立法机构附近甚至内部--是否是决定性的。我反对这种做法,而是强调旨在影响决策或政治议程的抗议与使用恐吓或暴力手段取代选举在遴选公职人员中的首要地位的抗议之间的区别。讨论认为,将示威概念化为代议制机构工作的补充,有助于促进公民政治平等这一难以实现的目标。文章还提出了能否就这一问题达成共识以及如何达成共识的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Deepening or Endangering Democracy: Demonstrations and Institutions under Representative Government
Do demonstrations tend to deepen or endanger democracy? I examine this theme of major debate between scholars and among political actors, analyzing how the United States and other democracies have dealt with—and been shaped by—popular pressure on representative institutions. Cases that are discussed include Martin Luther King’s 1963 March on Washington and the January 6, 2021 assault on the Capitol, as well as examples drawn from Spain, Portugal, and Italy. I offer clear principles to differentiate between types of protest that deepen democracy, advance the goal of inclusion, and others that endanger democratic principles. Among the issues I take up is whether the location of protest—for example, adjacent to or even inside legislative chambers—is decisive. Rejecting that approach, my argument instead emphasizes the difference between protests intended to influence policy-making or the political agenda and those that use intimidation or violence to replace the primacy of elections in selecting office holders. The discussion argues that conceptualizing demonstrations as complementary to the work of representative institutions can help to promote the difficult to obtain objective of political equality between citizens. The article also asks whether consensus on this matter can be attained and if so how.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Perspectives on Politics
Perspectives on Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
313
期刊介绍: Perspectives on Politics is a journal of broad interest to scholars across many fields, in addition to professional political scientists, political analysts, policy makers, and the informed public. Essays synthesize and extend significant research and developments in all dimensions of political science scholarship. In many cases, the journal aims to connect research findings, conceptual innovations, or theoretical developments to real problems of politics.
期刊最新文献
The Fossil-Fueled Roots of Climate Inaction in Authoritarian Regimes Sweden’s Peculiar Adoption of Proportional Representation: The Overlooked Effects of Time and History Waiting for Dignity: Legitimacy and Authority in Afghanistan. By Florian Weigand. New York: Columbia University Press, 2022. 384p. $140.00 cloth, $30.00 paper. Kant’s Grounded Cosmopolitanism: Original Common Possession and the Right to Visit. By Jakob Huber. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022. 208p. $90.00 cloth. The Power of Partisanship. By Joshua J. Dyck and Shanna Pearson-Merkowitz. New York: Oxford University Press, 2023. 250p. $99.00 cloth, $27.95 paper.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1