Search results

AbstractIn recent years, political theorists and others have questioned a series of longstanding assumptions about 'representative democracy'. There are renewed doubts as to whether our existing systems of political representation serve democracy, as well as new ideas and empirical work about what representation in politics involves. This article explores some recent innovations in thinking about representation, and in particular the idea of representation as a process of claim‐making. It discusses a number of ways in which the representative claim perspective helps us to challenge several well‐established ideas and practices of representative democracy, including the distinction between 'direct' and 'representative' democracy and the potential for non‐elective representation in democracies.

We do not need more 'models of democracy', but we do need a fresh view of democratic theory to take full advantage of deliberative, ecological, cosmopolitan and other innovations of recent years. Approaches such as these can be understood in terms of the devices they deploy – deliberative forums and cross-border referendums, for example, as well as more familiar elections and legislatures. Devices enact democratic principles; indeed, it is argued that principles gain their meaning and force through enactment. Devices can also be reordered in different ways; democrats can construct sequences which enact democracy in particular, desired ways. Pursuing this argument involves adopting a reflexive and procedural perspective, which puts a premium on democracy as sensitive to context, open-ended, productive and adaptable.