I first heard this phrase in John McMurty's: The Cancer Stage of Capitalism. He was quoting from a report commissioned by the Trilateral Commission in the mid-1970's (1973? 1975?). As I recall the argument was that the demands of citizens for participation in government was threatening to undermine the ability of the elite to rule effectively as they pleased. McMurty implied that, after the commission of this report, western governments and political parties attempted to discourage political involvement and that part of the result of their efforts was the increase in voter apathy. I read the book a few years ago so this is all from memory. Previously the term was used by David Herbert Donald, in his highly influencial essay "An Excess of Democracy" (1960). The essay was a partial revisionist explanation for the cause of the Civil War. He argued that the growth of Democracy in early 19th Century America, left the country unprepared to deal with difficult issues. This is because instead of having a ruling ellite capable of handling the subtlties of governance, politicians came to power on their ability to inflame public passions.
Federalism
They wanted to avoid having political parties.
liberal democracy. Democracy altogether. socialist democracy. Democracy elite. A pluralist democracy.
The democracy in ancient Athens was a direct democracy. The democracy in the United States was a representative democracy.
Define regular democracy. A democracy is a government by the people. A direct democracy is a type of democracy.
A direct democracy
democracy means choosing their leader by them and freedom
in a democracy
How does direct democracy differ from reprecentative democracy
representative democracy
A democracy.
No, the US has a representative democracy.