Featured White Papers
- Fax purchasing decision: Fax server or Fax service? (Esker)
- Enterprise PBX buyer's guide (VoIP-News)
- Hosted CRM comparison guide (Inside CRM)
Content provided in partnership with
The Shifting Boundaries of Democratic Governments
Social Research, Fall, 1999 by Robert A. Dahl
Skeptics argue that the conditions required for the function of democratic institutions simply do not exist at the international level and are unlikely to develop within any foreseeable time. I find myself among the skeptics.(14)
If the skeptics prove to be right, what then? If the governments of international organizations are not democratic now, and are not likely to be in the future, just what are they, and what might they be? Despite innumerable attempts over several thousand years to classify governments, we seem to have no generally acceptable typology into which to fit international governments.(15) I have no wish to add one more typology nor can I provide a succinct name to designate the type of government that tends to prevail in international organizations. However, I suggest that we view international governments as systems of decision-making by political and bureaucratic elites that operate with a very high degree of autonomy, within limits set by charters, treaties, or other international agreements.
At this point one might object that international organizations are not all that different from government bureaucracies within democratic countries. I think this response would be misleading. It is surely true that government bureaucracies within countries raise a similar problem; admittedly, to balance the need for expert judgment and independence with democratic control is a perennial problem. Yet the means for holding domestic bureaucracies accountable to democratically elected leaders are far stronger and more extensive than the means for holding international governing elites accountable. And the capacity of the interests they effect by their decisions to react and modify their decisions are, in my judgment, far greater. To dismiss the difference as merely a matter degree is rather like saying that the difference between enjoying a warm bath and plunging into boiling water is merely a matter of degree. In political life, most important differences are "a matter of degree." Even the issue of democratic versus nondemocratic governments is "a matter of degree." But for most of us the differences matter enormously.
If this judgment is roughly correct, it seems to me that international governments pose a problem for which we need a solution. If international organizations and processes were, on balance, undesirable a solution would be obvious and feasible. We should simply try to get rid of them. But getting rid of international organizations is not desirable, nor, probably, is it feasible. Like democratic governments within countries, whatever their defects the contributions of international organizations to human welfare are great and may become even greater. As examples, consider their contributions, actual and potential, to managing international conflicts, to improving health, economic growth, pollution control, meeting the challenge of global warming, human rights, and even, on occasion, to democratization and democratic stability.
Find Research Guides for:
Find Featured Titles for: Arts
Most Popular Articles in Reference
- The importance of understanding organizational culture
- Credit card attitudes and behaviors of college students
- What factors attract foreign direct investment?
- Libraries Need Relationship Marketing - mutual interest marketing concept, ...
- How to set performance goals: employee reviews are more than annual critiques
- More »