The Myth of Bourgeois Democracy

Andreas Møller Mulvad, Rune Møller Stahl

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingBook chapterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Mulvad and Stahl challenge the claim that parliamentary democracy is inherently ‘bourgeois’, identifying the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek as the most prominent contemporary proponent of this misguided idea. The chapter proceeds in three parts. First, it explores how the introduction of parliamentary democracy—defined as the ‘constitutionalisation’ of state power under a legislative body, with regular elections and universal suffrage—was everywhere a result of the activity of social movements working against the aspirations of both conservatives and liberals. Second, a rereading of Marx reveals that he actually wanted to radicalise representative democracy, not abolish it. Third, it is argued that Leninists and liberals have colluded in sustaining the myth of parliamentary democracy as a bourgeois invention. The conclusion asserts that the left’s task today is to defend existing representative institutions from persistent attacks, not abandon them.
Mulvad and Stahl challenge the claim that parliamentary democracy is inherently ‘bourgeois’, identifying the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek as the most prominent contemporary proponent of this misguided idea. The chapter proceeds in three parts. First, it explores how the introduction of parliamentary democracy—defined as the ‘constitutionalisation’ of state power under a legislative body, with regular elections and universal suffrage—was everywhere a result of the activity of social movements working against the aspirations of both conservatives and liberals. Second, a rereading of Marx reveals that he actually wanted to radicalise representative democracy, not abolish it. Third, it is argued that Leninists and liberals have colluded in sustaining the myth of parliamentary democracy as a bourgeois invention. The conclusion asserts that the left’s task today is to defend existing representative institutions from persistent attacks, not abandon them.
LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationFrom Financial Crisis to Social Change : Towards Alternative Horizons
EditorsTorsten Geelan, Marcos González Hernando, Peter William Walsh
Place of PublicationCham
PublisherPalgrave Macmillan
Date2018
Pages171-195
ISBN (Print)9783319705996
ISBN (Electronic)9783319706009
DOIs
StatePublished - 2018

Keywords

  • Parliamentary democracy
  • Liberalism
  • Marx
  • Žižek
  • Republicanism

Cite this

Mulvad, A. M., & Stahl, R. M. (2018). The Myth of Bourgeois Democracy. In T. Geelan, M. G. Hernando, & P. W. Walsh (Eds.), From Financial Crisis to Social Change: Towards Alternative Horizons (pp. 171-195). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-70600-9_10
Mulvad, Andreas Møller ; Stahl, Rune Møller. / The Myth of Bourgeois Democracy. From Financial Crisis to Social Change: Towards Alternative Horizons. editor / Torsten Geelan ; Marcos González Hernando ; Peter William Walsh. Cham : Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. pp. 171-195
@inbook{9977f63591a9402fbb6ba7245adc88d4,
title = "The Myth of Bourgeois Democracy",
abstract = "Mulvad and Stahl challenge the claim that parliamentary democracy is inherently ‘bourgeois’, identifying the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek as the most prominent contemporary proponent of this misguided idea. The chapter proceeds in three parts. First, it explores how the introduction of parliamentary democracy—defined as the ‘constitutionalisation’ of state power under a legislative body, with regular elections and universal suffrage—was everywhere a result of the activity of social movements working against the aspirations of both conservatives and liberals. Second, a rereading of Marx reveals that he actually wanted to radicalise representative democracy, not abolish it. Third, it is argued that Leninists and liberals have colluded in sustaining the myth of parliamentary democracy as a bourgeois invention. The conclusion asserts that the left’s task today is to defend existing representative institutions from persistent attacks, not abandon them.",
keywords = "Parliamentary democracy, Liberalism, Marx, Žižek, Republicanism, Parliamentary democracy, Liberalism, Marx, Žižek, Republicanism",
author = "Mulvad, {Andreas M{\o}ller} and Stahl, {Rune M{\o}ller}",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-319-70600-9_10",
language = "English",
isbn = "9783319705996",
pages = "171--195",
editor = "Torsten Geelan and Hernando, {Marcos Gonz{\'a}lez} and Walsh, {Peter William}",
booktitle = "From Financial Crisis to Social Change",
publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan",
address = "United Kingdom",

}

Mulvad, AM & Stahl, RM 2018, The Myth of Bourgeois Democracy. in T Geelan, MG Hernando & PW Walsh (eds), From Financial Crisis to Social Change: Towards Alternative Horizons. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 171-195. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-70600-9_10

The Myth of Bourgeois Democracy. / Mulvad, Andreas Møller; Stahl, Rune Møller.

From Financial Crisis to Social Change: Towards Alternative Horizons. ed. / Torsten Geelan; Marcos González Hernando; Peter William Walsh. Cham : Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. p. 171-195.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingBook chapterResearchpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - The Myth of Bourgeois Democracy

AU - Mulvad,Andreas Møller

AU - Stahl,Rune Møller

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Mulvad and Stahl challenge the claim that parliamentary democracy is inherently ‘bourgeois’, identifying the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek as the most prominent contemporary proponent of this misguided idea. The chapter proceeds in three parts. First, it explores how the introduction of parliamentary democracy—defined as the ‘constitutionalisation’ of state power under a legislative body, with regular elections and universal suffrage—was everywhere a result of the activity of social movements working against the aspirations of both conservatives and liberals. Second, a rereading of Marx reveals that he actually wanted to radicalise representative democracy, not abolish it. Third, it is argued that Leninists and liberals have colluded in sustaining the myth of parliamentary democracy as a bourgeois invention. The conclusion asserts that the left’s task today is to defend existing representative institutions from persistent attacks, not abandon them.

AB - Mulvad and Stahl challenge the claim that parliamentary democracy is inherently ‘bourgeois’, identifying the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek as the most prominent contemporary proponent of this misguided idea. The chapter proceeds in three parts. First, it explores how the introduction of parliamentary democracy—defined as the ‘constitutionalisation’ of state power under a legislative body, with regular elections and universal suffrage—was everywhere a result of the activity of social movements working against the aspirations of both conservatives and liberals. Second, a rereading of Marx reveals that he actually wanted to radicalise representative democracy, not abolish it. Third, it is argued that Leninists and liberals have colluded in sustaining the myth of parliamentary democracy as a bourgeois invention. The conclusion asserts that the left’s task today is to defend existing representative institutions from persistent attacks, not abandon them.

KW - Parliamentary democracy

KW - Liberalism

KW - Marx

KW - Žižek

KW - Republicanism

KW - Parliamentary democracy

KW - Liberalism

KW - Marx

KW - Žižek

KW - Republicanism

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-70600-9_10

DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-70600-9_10

M3 - Book chapter

SN - 9783319705996

SP - 171

EP - 195

BT - From Financial Crisis to Social Change

PB - Palgrave Macmillan

CY - Cham

ER -

Mulvad AM, Stahl RM. The Myth of Bourgeois Democracy. In Geelan T, Hernando MG, Walsh PW, editors, From Financial Crisis to Social Change: Towards Alternative Horizons. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2018. p. 171-195. Available from, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-70600-9_10