Ana Acatrinei (NIA 100409055) – Group 55

Transitional justice and democratization

13. 09. 2022
Rethinking Dimensions of Democracy for Empirical Analysis: Authenticity,
Quality, Depth, and Consolidation (Fishman, 2016)
The text offers rationale, in combining the most relevant contributions at the empirical and
theoretical level, for differentiating between four clear and operationalizable separate dimensions of
democracy. Namely, authenticity (how much this is a democracy? (matter of degree, non-
dichotomous) – according to neo-Schumpeterian standards), quality (how good in generally
universal normative terms is that democratic system?), depth (how honest and fair is the
democratic system for guaranteeing de facto political equality? / most interested academics are
usually left-oriented*), and consolidation (are conditions favorable for to democratic survival?).
These four dimensions are analytically distinct from one another and expected to variate
independently, as all good things may not always go always together in the same direction.
Each dimension can be thought of as an analytically defined cluster of features or phenomena that
share a conceptual relevance for how we understand democracy, both its successes and its
shortcomings, as seen through a lens rooted in aspirations driving the development of this political
system. This take argues against the inductive proposals stating that general trends on the actual
state of affairs should be first identified before conceptualizing what democracy is (meaning that a
priori definitions ought to be too idealistic and depart too far from reality, thus deeming useless in
orienting empirical research).

Democratic depth is presented as a term that is hoped to be a way to conceptualize how far
countries come in ensuring political equality [effective fulfilment of political equality (criticism that
the Schumpeterian definition is too shallow and does not go far enough to the core of democracy)].
Having functioning institutions is not enough, we need to go deeper. Possible mechanisms to
promote depth:
- Lottocratic mechanisms
- Participatory mechanisms including budgeting…
- Ensuring elected representatives listen to manifestations/ social movement (empirical
distinction)
- *Promotion of economic equality as an empirical question, derivative dimension
Why talk about democratic quality? Distinction between authenticity and quality.

Authenticity and consolidation as dimensions going hand in hand, in both cases we are talking
about whether a country is going to be a democracy. [Does transitional justice make a country more
democratic? Does it make it more complicated for the consolidation of a democratic system by
adding instability?]
The term consolidation refers to the extent to which a system strong enough in offering the conditions
favorable to democratic survival.

- The distinction advocated here enhances the ability of political analysis to contribute to
improvements in the status quo.
An important point of departure for usefully rethinking dimensions of democracy is to distinguish
between properties of free and representative systems that are constitutive of dimensions of
 Ana Acatrinei (NIA 100409055) – Group 55
Transitional justice and democratization
13. 09. 2022
democracy (elements essential to the genus of democracy) and those that are derivative of
democracy’s dimensions (“desirable” outcomes in democratic regimes).
Should the elements pertaining to this dimension be thought as constitutive or derivative
components of democracy? All derivative features can be thought to be caused by multiple
things and, as such, cannot be thought as constitutive of a single phenomena (democracy).
The phenomena belonging to derivative dimensions could be consequence of exogenous
factors, that cannot be blamed on democracy.
The term democratic quality is reserved for aspirational goals linked to normative democratic
theory’s hopes for outcomes that may become possible under democracy but are clearly not
required for a political system to warrant admission into the democratic regime category.
- Competitive authoritarianism (Levitsky-Way, 2010)  importance of credible commitment
to democratic values [authenticity dimension] (related to the constitutive elements of mutual
toleration and institutional forbearance in Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2018)
- Democracy for realists: why elections do not produce responsive government (Achen &
Bartels, 2016) [depth, maybe even quality in the sense that there are some groups that have
their interests represented to a lower extent and proportionally have less influence in
government]
o When talking about democracy, should we argue that political equality is essential feature
for the categorization as democracy? (Authenticity dimension)
 Representation
 What do we mean by political equality? Equal political rights or equal political influence in
power? [historical evolution of the concept of democracy / Tocqueville – the reigning
assumption is that everyone has the right to be treated equally, democracy as social equality
in interactions]
 Political equality as influence in the public debate, policy-making and political expression
outside of electoral processes.
 A lot of research showing that there is not a place where full political equality in all its
dimensions. However, this does not mean that we live under complete political inequality: a
matter of degree
 We need the vocabulary and tools to examine this matter
o Is political equality possible under current democracies?
o How should we conceptualize and measure the presence or absence of political equality in a
democracy?
o Is it possible to separate political equality from economic equality?