Do pressure groups promote or threaten democracy?

Created by: Naomi Arnold
Created on: 03-04-13 22:56


	Do pressure groups promote or threaten democracy?
	Advantages Supplementing electoral democracy - Elections exercise public opinion at the time but pressure groups keep governments up to date with public opinion between elections and give voice to sections of society who might otherwise be unheard or overlooked. Participation - the democratic problem of low turnout at elections is compensated when there is a high level of membership and involvement in pressure groups. Pressure groups are an increasingly popular vehicle of participation and a way in which people who can't/don't vote, like young people, can take part. Education - Pressure groups play a role in promoting healthy discussion and debate, and because they come from an angle of challenging long accepted views, they broaden the variety of beliefs and views, leading to a better informed public. An educated electorate means that public policy will better reflect the needs of society. Benefits of competition - Pressure groups constantly compete against each other which in turn evens out the spread of power; no group can be dominant indefinitely, as there is always another which challenges it. Public policy is formed around ongoing debate between pressure groups eg for/against animal testing/abortion, so power is evenly dispersed.	Disadvantages Political inequality - some say pressure groups concentrate power rather than spread it, because many groups exist just to strengthen the power and defend the interests of its members. The most successful groups tend to be the wealthiest/closest to government rather than the most popular. Sections of society not represented - Some parts of society don't have a voice in the form of pressure groups because either it would be impossible to organize or they are dependent on other people - eg children's interests, asylum seekers, the homeless, the mentally ill. Non-legitimate power - Pressure groups leaders are not elected nor are they obligated to have an internal democratic system, so their influence on government policy doesn't hold a strong legitimate basis. Is it right that people who have not been elected should have a say in government policy? Behind the scenes influence - Pressure groups are not accountable or subject to scrutiny so the way in which they influence the government has little legal restrictions. Insider groups often put pressure on civil servants and lurk around parliament, and many of the deals made in policy-making are made directly between the executive and pressure groups, totally bypassing parliament. This undermines parliamentary democracy. Tyranny of the minority - because pressure groups serve primarily to represent minorities in society, this prevents the 'tyranny of the majority', where anything that the majority of society wants is deemed acceptable. But this can sometimes lead to the opposite problem, where the voice of the minority is given greater value than everyone else, which makes it hard for governments to act for the best interest of society as a whole.
	Evaluation Pressure groups do to an extent promote democracy in creating another channel in which people can partake in politics and offering a variety of sources in which people can keep in touch with issues which affect society other than just the main political parties and the media. However, because there are so many pressure groups out there all battling for the attention of the government, the ways in which they try to exert an influence can become underhand and undermine parliamentary democracy, and if pressure groups are given too much voice, this leads to minority groups having a greater influence than society as a whole.

Do pressure groups promote or threaten democracy?

Advantages

Supplementing electoral democracy - Elections exercise public opinion at the time but pressure groups keep governments up to date with public opinion between elections and give voice to sections of society who might otherwise be unheard or overlooked.
Participation - the democratic problem of low turnout at elections is compensated when there is a high level of membership and involvement in pressure groups. Pressure groups are an increasingly popular vehicle of participation and a way in which people who can't/don't vote, like young people, can take part.
Education - Pressure groups play a role in promoting healthy discussion and debate, and because they come from an angle of challenging long accepted views, they broaden the variety of beliefs and views, leading to a better informed public. An educated electorate means that public policy will better reflect the needs of society.
Benefits of competition - Pressure groups constantly compete against each other which in turn evens out the spread of power; no group can be dominant indefinitely, as there is always another which challenges it. Public policy is formed around ongoing debate between pressure groups eg for/against animal testing/abortion, so power is evenly dispersed.

Disadvantages

Political inequality - some say pressure groups concentrate power rather than spread it, because many groups exist just to strengthen the power and defend the interests of its members. The most successful groups tend to be the wealthiest/closest to government rather than the most popular.
Sections of society not represented - Some parts of society don't have a voice in the form of pressure groups because either it would be impossible to organize or they are dependent on other people - eg children's interests, asylum seekers, the homeless, the mentally ill.
Non-legitimate power - Pressure groups leaders are not elected nor are they obligated to have an internal democratic system, so their influence on government policy doesn't hold a strong legitimate basis. Is it right that people who have not been elected should have a say in government policy?
Behind the scenes influence - Pressure groups are not accountable or subject to scrutiny so the way in which they influence the government has little legal restrictions. Insider groups often put pressure on civil servants and lurk around parliament, and many of the deals made in policy-making are made directly between the executive and pressure groups, totally bypassing parliament. This undermines parliamentary democracy.
Tyranny of the minority - because pressure groups serve primarily to represent minorities in society, this prevents the 'tyranny of the majority', where anything that the majority of society wants is deemed acceptable. But this can sometimes lead to the opposite problem, where the voice of the minority is given greater value than everyone else, which makes it hard for governments to act for the best interest of society as a whole.

Evaluation

Pressure groups do to an extent promote democracy in creating another channel in which people can partake in politics and offering a variety of sources in which people can keep in touch with issues which affect society other than just the main political parties and the media. However, because there are so many pressure groups out there all battling for the attention of the government, the ways in which they try to exert an influence can become underhand and undermine parliamentary democracy, and if pressure groups are given too much voice, this leads to minority groups having a greater influence than society as a whole.

Get Revising

Do pressure groups promote or threaten democracy?