The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Rethinking Technology and Engineering

Part of the book series: Philosophy of Engineering and Technology ((POET,volume 45))

  • 237 Accesses

Abstract

Democracy as we know it is currently in crisis and this has generated a critical reexamination of many of its characteristics. Although democracies are mainly representative democracies, lately there has been a tendency to propose more mechanism of direct democracy with the help of digital technology, known as Digital Direct Democracy (DDD). While DDD is one of many manifestations of the penetration of technology in democracy, which is described by the broader name of E-Democracy, it is an especially problematic one. Through this chapter I will: (i) explain the relevance of E-Democracy and the place that DDD has within it; (ii) make a critical assessment of the main philosophical arguments used by DDD promoters to justify its implementations, mainly the ancient Athenian model and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Finally, I will give a balanced assessment of the desirability of digital technological penetration in the different levels of citizen participation in democracy. For this, I will distinguish three levels of participation: (i) being informed; (ii) giving opinions and feedback to political representatives; (iii) voting and making political decisions. Considering that DDD is being proposed as applicable to all these levels, I will propose to abandon any attempts of DDD and instead use technology mainly in the first level, less in the second and in very limited situations of the third.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arenilla, M. (2010). Concepts in democratic theory. In D. Ríos & S. French (Eds.), E-democracy: A group decision and negotiation perspective (pp. 15–30). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. (1944). Aristotle in 23 volumes (Vol. 21) [Pol.], (H. Rackham, Trans.). Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, J. (2018). The people vs tech. Ebury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, M. (2015). The world beyond your head. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tocqueville, A. (2002). Democracy in America. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deneen, P. (2018). Why liberalism failed. Yale University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Edelmann, N., & Cruickshank, P. (2012). Introducing psychological factors into E-participation research. In A. Manoharan & M. Holzer (Eds.), E-governance and civic engagement: Factors and determinants of E-democracy (pp. 338–361). Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (1996). Green paper – Living and working in the information society: People first. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/8bcd9942-f9ef-4fe7-9637-936af5c0fd85

  • Garrison, T. (2017). Politicizing digital space: Theory, the internet, and renewing democracy. University of Westminster Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerbaudo, P. (2019). The digital party: Political organization and online democracy. Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R., & Spiekermann, K. (2018). An epistemic theory of democracy. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. An inquiry into a category of Bourgeois society (T. Burger, Trans.). MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, M., et al. (1999). Develo** digital democracy: Evidence from Californian municipal web pages. In B. Hague & B. Loader (Eds.), Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age (pp. 97–116). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaun, A., & Guyard, C. (2012). The Obama effect: The perception of campaigning 2.0 in Swedish National Election 2010. In A. Manoharan & M. Holzer (Eds.), E-governance and civic engagement: Factors and determinants of E-democracy (pp. 524–542). Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Korthagen, I., et al. (2019). Non-binding decision-making. In L. Hennen et al. (Eds.), European E-democracy in practice (pp. 237–272). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, V. (2017). State of the art of E-democracy for smart cities. In V. Kumar (Ed.), E-democracy for smart cities (pp. 1–50). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How democracies die. Crown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malina, A. (1999). Perspectives on citizen democratization and alienation in the virtual public sphere. In B. Hague & B. Loader (Eds.), Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age (pp. 23–38). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manent, P. (2018). Tocqueville y la naturaleza de la democracia. IES.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. (1999). Democracy and cyberspace. In B. Hague & B. Loader (Eds.), Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age (pp. 39–62). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mpoitsis, I., & Koutsoupias, N. (2013). E-ekklesia: The challenge of direct democracy and the ancient athenian model. In A. Sideridis et al. (Eds.), E-democracy, security, privacy and trust in a digital world, 5th international conference, E-democracy 2013, Athens, Greece, December 5–6, 2013 revised selected papers (pp. 52–64). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Older, M., & Pirtle, Z. (2021). Imagined systems: How the speculative novel infomocracy offers a simulation of the relationship between democracy, technology, and society. In Z. Pirtle et al. (Eds.), Engineering and philosophy reimagining technology and social progress. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parlak, B., & Sobaci, Z. (2010). A comparative analysis of local agenda 21 websites in Turkey in terms of E-participation. In C. Reddick (Ed.), Politics, democracy, and E-government: Participation and service delivery (pp. 75–93). Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, J.-J. (1999). The social contract. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolin, S. (2008). Democracy incorporated. Managed democracy and the specter of inverted totalitarianism. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matías Quer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Quer, M. (2023). The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations. In: Fritzsche, A., Santa-María, A. (eds) Rethinking Technology and Engineering. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 45. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Navigation