Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Tables
- Figures
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- 1 Direct Democracy at the Turn of the Century
- 2 Terms of the Debate Surrounding Direct Democracy
- 3 Myths and Facts behind the Use of Mechanisms of Direct Democracy
- 4 Direct Democracy within Nondemocratic Regimes
- 5 Direct Democracy within Weak Democracies
- 6 Direct Democracy within Democracies
- 7 Uruguayan Citizen-Initiated Mechanisms of Direct Democracy as Agents of Vertical Accountability
- 8 Conclusions
- Appendix
- References
- Index
6 - Direct Democracy within Democracies
The Case of Uruguay (Historic Evolution and Voting Behavior)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 March 2011
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Tables
- Figures
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- 1 Direct Democracy at the Turn of the Century
- 2 Terms of the Debate Surrounding Direct Democracy
- 3 Myths and Facts behind the Use of Mechanisms of Direct Democracy
- 4 Direct Democracy within Nondemocratic Regimes
- 5 Direct Democracy within Weak Democracies
- 6 Direct Democracy within Democracies
- 7 Uruguayan Citizen-Initiated Mechanisms of Direct Democracy as Agents of Vertical Accountability
- 8 Conclusions
- Appendix
- References
- Index
Summary
Ciudadanos: el resultado de la campaña pasada me puso al frente de vosotros por el voto sagrado de vuestra voluntad general. […] Mi autoridad emana de vosotros y ella cesa ante vuestra presencia soberana.
José Gervasio Artigas, National Hero of Uruguay (April 5, 1813)Whereas Chapters 4 and 5 dealt with MDDs in the context of authoritarian and weak democratic regimes, respectively, this chapter shifts our attention to the use of these mechanisms in a relatively stable democratic regime. This and the following chapter tackle a unique case study: Uruguay. But why use a case study, and why Uruguay in particular? Three factors make Uruguay a particularly useful case study. First, Uruguay demonstrates significant variation in the dependent variable (referendums, plebiscites, popular initiatives, and legislative counterproposals). Second, Uruguay has a peculiar party system that makes it relatively easy to observe what is happening inside parties because the internal divisions are clear. Finally, Uruguay is the most prodigious user of CI-MDDs in the global south; it does not belong to the “developed” north, neither is it a member of the OECD or the European Union. All these factors make it an “ideal case” for understanding direct democracy.
The intensive study of a case allows the decision-making process to be closely analyzed in order “to sift more finely through varied sources of evidence, and to pursue traces of politicians' reasoning and calculations in ways not possible when the field of observation spans many national settings” (Mershon 1996: 539).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Direct Democracy Worldwide , pp. 140 - 161Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010