The Centrality of Voting in Democracy: The Plebiscitarian Origins of the Idea

Democracy is often equated with voting, an assumption shared by many defenders, reformers, and critics of liberal democracy. This article explores the origins of the idea of the centrality of voting in democracy, arguing that current thinking about liberal democracy is heavily influenced by a nearly forgotten tradition of plebiscitary democracy. Originally conceived with a reverence for personalist leadership, this tradition sought to tame democracy. The article outlines three key stages in the development of the plebiscitary theory of voting. In the 19th century, the Bonapartist regime in France embraced the expansion of suffrage as a means to solidify monarchical power through popular acclamations. In the interwar period, thinkers such as Max Weber and Carl Schmitt, reflecting on the American and French mass voting experiences, developed a plebiscitary interpretation of voting and suggested a normative justification for a synthesis of democracy and monarchy. Later, plebiscitary theory influenced political science and its techniques for measuring democracy, notably through Joseph Schumpeter’s minimalist view, which, as argued here, was shaped by plebiscitarian intuitions. The focus on elections and plebiscites is unlikely to revive democracy; instead, it may pave the way for powerful monarchical leaders who claim to rely on popular will.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Politics and Governance
Published
2025-05-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.9722
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Political Theory and Influence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
17.04

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Centrality of Voting in Democracy: The Plebiscitarian Origins of the Idea

Gregory Yudin
2 citations
Politics and Governance
Political Theory and Influence
17.04
article

The Centrality of Voting in Democracy: The Plebiscitarian Origins of the Idea

Gregory Yudin
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Democracy is often equated with voting, an assumption shared by many defenders, reformers, and critics of liberal democracy. This article explores the origins of the idea of the centrality of voting in democracy, arguing that current thinking about liberal democracy is heavily influenced by a nearly forgotten tradition of plebiscitary democracy. Originally conceived with a reverence for personalist leadership, this tradition sought to tame democracy. The article outlines three key stages in the development of the plebiscitary theory of voting. In the 19th century, the Bonapartist regime in France embraced the expansion of suffrage as a means to solidify monarchical power through popular acclamations. In the interwar period, thinkers such as Max Weber and Carl Schmitt, reflecting on the American and French mass voting experiences, developed a plebiscitary interpretation of voting and suggested a normative justification for a synthesis of democracy and monarchy. Later, plebiscitary theory influenced political science and its techniques for measuring democracy, notably through Joseph Schumpeter’s minimalist view, which, as argued here, was shaped by plebiscitarian intuitions. The focus on elections and plebiscites is unlikely to revive democracy; instead, it may pave the way for powerful monarchical leaders who claim to rely on popular will.

Politics and GovernanceVol. 13
Centre de Recherches Historiques (FR)
Princeton University, University Center for Human Values, Princeton University
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Political Theory and Influence
17.04
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.