Collier and Levitsky introduce an interesting method of defining democracy through the use of adjectives, which allows for differentiation between types of democracy while “avoiding conceptual stretching”. They do so by using a minimalist definition of democracy, which will be addressed later on in the post, and placing it within Sartori’s “ladder of generality” in order to organize concepts. Theoretically speaking, if democracy is in the middle of this ladder, moving up on the ladder of generality would have less defining attributes (and therefore more generality), and moving down on the ladder would include more defining attributes. For the purpose of their analysis, they define democracy procedurally: that is, defining the necessary procedures of democracies rather than the outcomes. Their minimal definition includes the following procedural attributes: contested elections, full suffrage, and guarantee of civil liberties.
“Democracies with adjectives” are then types of democracies described with a specific adjective to differentiate between them, without stretching or changing the defining attributes of the concept of democracy itself. For example, parliamentary democracies and presidential democracies both have have the attributes necessary to be considered a democracy, but are undeniably different in structure. These would then be placed lower on the ladder of generality, as they have more specifically defining attributes. Collier and Levitsky refer to these as “classical subtypes”. The classical subtype of parliamentary democracy is discussed in this Winnipeg Free Press editorial, which is highly critical of the Canadian government’s intentions to put committee meetings “behind closed doors”. Her use of the term “parliamentary democracy” was specifically in reference to the proroguing of government in 2008.
Another level of differentiation is “diminished subtypes”. Unlike classical subtypes, these are democracies that are specifically defined by what aspect they are missing from the root concept of democracy. Illiberal democracies, for example, are characterized by missing the core attribute of civil liberties. This article in the news this week uses the diminished subtype of illiberal democracy as an example in defining where Turkey is heading. As the author argues, to a certain extent Turkey is getting more democratic (with “the power of ballots being consolidated”); on the other hand, journalists are being imprisoned, limiting civil liberties such as free speech.
Leave a Reply