19 quotes
One of the difficulties that confronts anyone who attempts to answer the question, "Who rules in a pluralist democracy?" is the ambiguous relationship of leaders to citizens.
Who Governs?: Democracy and Power in an American City (1961)
Is the ordinary person incompetent? No judgment is more decisive for one's political philosophy. It was perhaps the single most important difference in judgment between Plato and Aristotle.
In a magic show, mystification is a good thing, but it is hardly to be commended in an economic program.
After the Revolution? (1970)
The democratic process in governing a country is not necessarily enhanced by democratizing subsidiary parts of the process.
After the Revolution? (1970)
Even in a democratic country, it appears, nondemocratic forms of authority might sometimes be tolerable, perhaps actually desirable.
After the Revolution? (1970)
Actual practices in the advanced democratic countries are, then, far too diverse and complex to be captured by ideologies.
After the Revolution? (1970)
Probably nothing strengthened the impetus of socialists toward bureaucratic centralization more than their implacable rejection of economic controls in general and the market in particular.
After the Revolution? (1970)
If a matter is best dealt with by a democratic association, seek always to have that matter dealt with by the smallest association that can deal with it satisfactorily.
After the Revolution? (1970)
Democracy in the sense of political equality and majority rule is by no means the most desirable, that is, optimal solution for all kinds of associations.
After the Revolution? (1970)
In considering whether a larger association would be more satisfactory, do not fail to consider its extra costs, including a possible increase in the sense of individual powerlessness.
After the Revolution? (1970)
In addition, a century or more of efforts to arrive at a feasible and politically acceptable mix of market and nonmarket elements has not produced a definitive, stable, or uniform solution.
After the Revolution? (1970)
I concluded also that Madison had more confidence in majorities than I gave him credit for; or more accutely, that he was somewhat less distrustful and hostile to majority rule than I had supposed.
A Preface to Democratic Theory (2006)
That democratization has never closely approached its theoretical limits, either in the government of the state or in the government of other institutions, is revealed in the three great historical movement toward democratizing the state.
After the Revolution? (1970)
Many of the criticisms of capitalism advanced by socialists were essentially correct. Capitalism is persistently at odds with values of equity, fairness, political equality among all citizens, and democracy.
After the Revolution? (1970)
If the Madisonian democratic republicans had been able to foresee the later experience with constitutions in democratic countries, including the experience of the United States, would they have made the choices they made in 1787? I very much doubt it.
A Preface to Democratic Theory (2006)
People can be deceived by appeals intended to destroy democracy in the name of democracy. Dissenters who believe in the democratic creed may unwittingly advocate or legitimists may insist on preserving rules of the game destined to have unforeseen and unintended consequences disastrous to the stability and perhaps the survival of the democracy.
Who Governs?: Democracy and Power in an American City (1961)
It would be more realistic to think of all economic enterprise as a public service. Thought of in this perspective, a private economy is a contradiction in terms. Every economy is a public or social (not socialist) economy.
After the Revolution? (1970)
It seems obvious, then, that the search for solutions to the problems generated by a predominantly privately owned market-oriented society has been and will continue to be a major element in the political agenda of every democratic country.
After the Revolution? (1970)
Power and influence have been the center of—this is not necessarily an argument in favor of keeping it, but power and influence have been the center of the field of the study of politics from the beginning. And what’s more, they are the central elements in all of our lives, our daily lives and our family lives, this interview going on—and they’re enormously complex.
A Conversation with Robert A. Dahl (2009)