critiques of democracy
1) Explain, accurately and substantively, the central claims of each author, making absolutely clear their main criticisms of democracy.
2) Elaborate how each author’s proposed solution to the problems with democracy. Ought we to pursue certain kinds of reforms? Should we simply adopt a different way of thinking about democracy or voting, or perhaps we would do better to emphasize other ways of political participation or representation? Or perhaps it is a question of adopting certain values and rejecting others?
3) Compare and contrast the authors’ claims. Make at least three points of comparison or contrast. For example, you could point out where theories may overlap and agree, or you could explain how authors’ solutions are fundamentally at odds. These can be stark or subtle contrasts, explicit or implicit comparisons.
4) Finally, make an argument for which author or which claims you find most valid and compelling. Which of these authors seems to have hit the mark, whether it be with their evaluation of democracy or with their proposed solutions? Which did you find most convincing and why?