Hello Aspirants
Here, I give you the summarised version of everything that I taught you in this topic in PSIR Optional Foundation classes. If you are not able to recall the concept or scholar, then go back to class notes and handouts.
UPSC has asked 4 ten-mark questions, 7 fifteen-mark questions, and 1 twenty-mark question from this topic in last 12 years.
1. Why democracy?
- Consent vs. coercion – a democratic government derives decisions from the governed; an authoritarian one imposes them.
- Beyond a mere form
- T. Lowell: democracy is still an “experiment.”
- Lincoln, Dicey & Lord Bryce: it is also an ethical creed that honours equality and
- Instrumental, educational & intrinsic pay-offs – highlighted by Rousseau, J. S. Mill and Amartya Sen (democratising development).
- B. R. Ambedkar: liberty-equality-fraternity must fuse, else democracy stays skin-deep.
2. Direct-democracy ideal (Rousseau) & its hard pre-conditions
Less population | low material wants | absence of luxury – otherwise the general will is swamped by faction.
- Churchill: democracy is the “least-worst” alternative.
- Lee Kuan Yew counters with benevolent despotism for Asian contexts.
3. Representative → Participatory → Deliberative models
| Model | Core logic | Key scholars | Flaws |
| Representative | Elect & authorise elites to rule; accountability through periodic polls. | Madison, Mill, Dicey | Elite capture, low day-to-day input |
| Participatory | Widen direct engagement in workplaces, local governments, social movements. | Pateman, Bookchin; echoed in Macpherson’s “participatory democracy” | Scalability, decision fatigue |
| Deliberative | Legitimacy arises from public reason – policies must survive rational, inclusive debate. | Jürgen Habermas (discursive will-formation); James Fishkin (deliberative polling) | Risk of domination by articulate or resource-rich speakers |
4. Huntington’s Three Waves (and the pauses that followed)
- First wave (1828-1926) – W. Europe & USA expand suffrage → First reverse (1922-42) rise of fascism.
- Second wave (1943-62) – post-war & decolonising states → Second reverse (1958-75) military coups.
- Third wave (1974-90s) – Carnation Revolution → Latin America, E. Europe, parts of Asia adopt elections.
No settled “fourth reverse”, yet democratic back-sliding (Russia, parts of Africa) alarms scholars.
5. Macpherson’s four “Life-and-Times” democracies
| Type | Historic roots & aim | Strength | Weakness |
| Protective | Locke, James Mill: guard property & personal security | Rule-of-law floor | Marginalises have-nots |
| Developmental | Rousseau, J. S. Mill: politics as moral–intellectual growth | Citizen formation | Ignores structural blocks |
| Equilibrium / Pluralist | Dahl: interest-group bargaining, elite competition | Stability, incrementalism | Elitist, passive masses |
| Participatory | 1960s new-left, workplace democracy | Deepens equality, economic & political | Scale & resource dilemmas |
Macpherson’s conclusion: Combine developmental virtue with participatory reach to escape liberal shortfalls.
6. Current tensions & debates
- Economic pre-conditions – Lipset’s “wealth fosters democracy”; Sen counters that rights catalyse development too.
- Globalisation – integrates publics but also fuels inequality, spawning authoritarian populism.
- Digital public sphere – amplifies both deliberation (crowdsourced policy) and disinformation (echo-chambers).
7. Elitist (Classical‐Realist) Model
| Corner-stone | Scholar & Text | Core propositions | main concept |
| Inevitable minority rule | Gaetano Mosca – The Ruling Class | Every society is divided into a small “political class” that governs and a larger governed class. Bureaucratic chains of command secure elite dominance. | Political class |
| Elite circulation | Vilfredo Pareto | Talent and ambition are rare; new groups continually displace old ones, but rule never becomes popular self-government. | Circulation of elites; governing vs counter-elite |
| Iron Law of Oligarchy | Robert Michels | All organisations, even socialist parties & unions, crystallise into oligarchies once they grow. | Organisational oligarchy |
| Democracy as competition of leaders | Joseph Schumpeter – Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy | Democracy = an institutional arrangement where elites vie for votes to gain authority; citizens choose, they do not rule. | Competitive elitism |
Rebuttal to classical democracy: people neither rule nor deliberate; real power stays with a talented minority whose decisions the majority ratifies.
8. Pluralist (Equilibrium) Model
| Building block | Insight | Key voices |
| Poly-centred power | No single ruling group; multiple interest-group “mini-elites” balance one another under a neutral state umpire. | Robert A. Dahl – Polyarchy; A Preface to Democratic Theory |
| Market–government “mutual adjustment” | Policy emerges from bargaining among business, bureaucrats & politicians rather than from a unitary will. | Charles E. Lindblom – Politics and Markets |
| Interest-group politics | Groups rise when social-economic change disturbs the status quo; they articulate demands & broker compromise. | David B. Truman – The Governmental Process |
| Madisonian pedigree | Factions are inevitable; a large republic and a multiplicity of interests prevent any one faction from tyrannising. | James Madison – Federalist 10 |
Pluralism rejects both mass-rule romance and monolithic elites: democracy works because organised minorities check one another in an open arena.
9. Cosmopolitan / Trans-national Democracy
Global problems demand global demos
- David Held, Daniele Archibugi, Jürgen Habermas: create multilayered global governance, trans-national public spheres, enforceable global rights.
- Habermas: democratise bodies such as the UN and WTO; anchor legitimacy in rational communication across borders.
- Held: cosmopolitan democracy extends consent, participation and accountability beyond the nation-state.
10. Representative Democracy – “Second-best but workable”
| Representation style | Architect | Essence |
| Trusteeship | John Locke | Office-holders are trustees of the people; duty-bound to the common good, not private whim. |
| Enlightened representation | Edmund Burke | MPs owe constituents judgement, not obedience; Parliament should discern the national interest above faction. |
Success hinges on vigilant electors who question representatives, keep them answerable and periodically renew mandates.
12. Participatory Democracy – Reviving the Classical Ideal
Championed by Aristotle (polity), Jean-Jacques Rousseau (general will), Hannah Arendt (public freedom), Mohandas K. Gandhi (Gram Swaraj & Sarvodaya).
- Assumes widespread, continuous civic engagement.
- Participation educates citizens, yields collectively wiser decisions, and embeds legitimacy in shared action.
13. Deliberative / Discursive Democracy
| Pillar | Scholar and Key notions |
| Normative core | Amy Gutmann & Dennis Thompson – deliberation = citizens justify laws to one another with publicly accessible reasons. |
| Ideal Speech Situation | Jürgen Habermas – all may speak, argument alone directs agreement (communicative action). |
| Reasonable pluralism | John Rawls – “burden of judgement”, “overlapping consensus”; respect for diverse yet reasonable doctrines. |
| Public / counter-public | Nancy Fraser – subaltern groups need autonomous arenas (“counter-publics”) to forge arguments. |
| Institutional features | Joshua Cohen – independent association, non-coercive setting, plural values, deliberation as sole source of legitimacy. |
| Mini-public tools | James S. Fishkin – deliberative polls; criteria: information, substantive balance, diversity, conscientiousness, equal consideration. |
Generational improvements in Deliberative Democracy
1st Generation– Founders – Habermas, Cohen: pure normative blueprint.
2nd Generation– Pragmatists – John Dryzek, Gutmann/Thompson: “agree to disagree,” storytelling & rhetoric permitted.
3rd Generation– Institutional innovators – Graham Elstub, Jane Mansbridge, Fishkin: citizens’ juries, consensus conferences, planning cells.
4th Generation – Systemic turn – Mansbridge, Thomas Christiano, John Parkinson: deliberation as a networked system not a single forum.
Benefits: manages disagreement, deepens legitimacy, educates public, yields better-informed policy, fosters trust.
Challenges: structural inequality skews voice; culturally specific speech norms might exclude; assumes citizens’ sustained rational engagement.
Scholars Index :
B. R. Ambedkar | Daniele Archibugi | Hannah Arendt | Aristotle | Murray Bookchin | James Bryce | Edmund Burke | Winston Churchill | Thomas Christiano | Joshua Cohen | Robert A. Dahl | A. V. Dicey | John Dryzek | Graham Elstub | James S. Fishkin | Nancy Fraser | Mohandas K. Gandhi | Amy Gutmann | Jürgen Habermas | David Held | Samuel P. Huntington | Lee Kuan Yew | Abraham Lincoln | Charles E. Lindblom | Seymour Martin Lipset | John Locke | A. T. Lowell | C. B. Macpherson | James Madison | Jane Mansbridge | Robert Michels | James Mill | John Stuart Mill | Gaetano Mosca | Vilfredo Pareto | John Parkinson | Carole Pateman | John Rawls | Jean-Jacques Rousseau | Joseph Schumpeter | Amartya Sen | Dennis Thompson | David B. Truman
(Cohort 1 of PSIR O-AWFG & ATS programmes, starting 11 June, will track these shifts through and my evaluation will be looking for the contextual mentioning of these scholars in your copies)
Practice Questions (Write before 4 p.m.)
Question 1. Comment on Substantive democracy. (UPSC 2018, 10 marks)
Question 2. Deliberative democracy seeks to promote democratic decision-making about public issues among the citizens. Discuss (UPSC 2024, 15 marks)
Question 3. Success of contemporary democracies lies in the State limiting its own power.” Comment. (2023, 20 marks)
📌 Model answers drop this evening on the Telegram channel: https://t.me/psirbyamitpratap – keep notifications on.
See you tomorrow on Day 7. Keep practicing!
—Amit Pratap Singh & Team
A quick note on submissions of copies and mentorship
- 2025 Mains writers: Cohort 1 of O-AWFG kicks off 11 June and ATS on 15 June. The above practice set will serve as your revision tool for Test 1, just do not miss booking your mentorship sessions for personalised feedback especially for starting tests. Come with your evaluated test copies.
- 2026 Mains writers – keep uploading through your usual dashboard. This topic is in test 4 of PSIR-AWFG and ATS 1
- Alternate between mini-tests (O-AWFG) and full mocks (ATS) has been designed to tackle speed, content depth, and structured revision—line-by-line evaluation pinpoints your weaknesses and errors. Follow your PSIR O-AWFG & ATS schedule and use the model answers to enrich your content, as rankers recommended based on their own success.
| Click Here to Download the PDF |
Discover more from Free UPSC IAS Preparation Syllabus and Materials For Aspirants
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
