ABSTRACT
In the 1990s, certain critical voices on the relation between citizen and government started to sound alarmed. Taking low turnouts for the elections as their main starting point, they insisted on either “reinventing” government, decentralizing government, revitalizing political parties, changing the subject or system of elections, or simply “educating” the citizen. Although the problem concerns all administrative levels and divisions, the alarm is particularly prompted by the condition of the big cities, which indeed show lower levels of electoral participation than smaller cities or rural areas. One of the arguments was that some cities are too large for the provision of proper service standards and for the effective identification of the citizenry. This argument ignores the great social and ethnic variety in urban society and the special conditions leading to social exclusion. With respect to identification, Amsterdam nevertheless has put on some singular displays of attachment. In a referendum held in 1995 on a new metropolitan administrative structure, Amsterdam’s citizens voted vehemently against the idea of “their” city being broken up into a number of boroughs. Despite official reassurance, the proposed structure was perceived as an unacceptable loss of identity.
