Premium
Defending What From Whom? Debating Citizen Disengagement
Author(s) -
Forstenzer Joshua
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
the political quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.373
H-Index - 37
eISSN - 1467-923X
pISSN - 0032-3179
DOI - 10.1111/1467-923x.12198
Subject(s) - disengagement theory , argument (complex analysis) , democracy , politics , accountability , sociology , position (finance) , intervention (counseling) , political economy , corporate governance , law and economics , law , political science , economics , management , psychology , gerontology , medicine , biochemistry , chemistry , finance , psychiatry
This article constitutes a pointed theoretical intervention in the debate opposing Richards and Smith to Flinders on the question of citizen disengagement. Its main contention is that Richards and Smith offer a straw‐man argument against Flinders by identifying him with positions he does not hold. It thus shows that Richards and Smith falsely identify Flinders with the following positions: (a) there is no need for a major overhaul in the UK 's existing democratic and governance arrangements; (b) the problem of citizen disengagement is caused by the public's insatiable demand for democratic participation; and (c) the problem with British politics is that there is too much democracy and accountability. Finally, the article closes by identifying points of genuine tension between the Richards/Smith position and that defended by Flinders.