DIFFERENCES, COMPROMISES AND （分歧,妥协,）.pdf

DIFFERENCES, COMPROMISES AND DEMOCRATIC THEORY. From Pluralism to Multiculturalism Erkki Berndtson Department of Political Science P.O.Box 54 (Unioninkatu 37) 00014 University of Helsinki Finland Tel. (+358-9) 191 8828 Fax: (+358-9) 191 8832 E-mail: erkki.berndtson@helsinki.fi Prepared for Presentation at the XXXIst Annual Meeting of the Finnish Political Science Association Turku, Finland, January 14-15, 1999 1 Contemporary Democratic Theory as American Theory of Democracy Democratic theory today is very much an American endeavour. It has been mainly Americans who have been eager to justify democracy theoretically as well as to evaluate its success in other countries. To say this does neither diminish the European heritage of democratic thinking, nor does it deny that there are European scholars who write about democracy. But the discussion is framed in many instances by Americans. A good example is David Held́s much acclaimed treatise on Models of Democracy (1987). Beginning with classical democracy in Athens and after rampaging through centuries of development of democratic theory in Europe, Held finally focuses on contemporary theories of democracy, which are mainly American: competitive elitist democracy, pluralism, neo-pluralism, legal democracy and participatory democracy. Of course one can argue that many of these theories are the product of European scholarship and political activity. Even Held looks at Max Weber as a generator of competitive elitism and takes Joseph Schumpeter as i