ABSTRACT
My impression is that ways of thinking about democracy have gone through a series of phases. The first two of these involved an emphasis on “essentialist” positions. In the first instance, theorists and philosophers sought the essential substance of democracy. Then, there was a search for the key components, for the essence, of the procedural necessities of democracy, pushing aside the concern for substantive outcomes, but still trying to define the core necessities and mechanisms of the process. Arend Lijphart, for example, concluded a long series of studies with his most recent volume, Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries, 1 emphatically fastening on differences between the “consensus model” and the “majoritarian” model of democracy.
