Pluralism is the way in which the electorate joins groups to have an effect on government. Many pro-pluralists believe pluralism exists to stop the perceived failures of a representative democracy. They think pluralism contributes to representative democracy because people are denied influence between elections. Furthermore they add that manifesto promises are usually broken, with no repercussions on the government. Pressure groups like Greenpeace, put pressure on the government to not do this.
Another good reason for pressure groups is people are denied influence between elections and even in elections a single vote doesn’t have much of an affect on the outcome. In addition to this the one vote doesn’t’t represent the variation in intensity with which views are held for whether or not this is a pro-pluralist or anti-pluralist factor is subject to opinion. However one thing is for sure, four to five years is a long time for the electorate to not have a say in their government. New issues come up and popular opinion changes, having pressure groups allow the population to be heard more regularly - something which is surely good for a democracy which is meant to represent the people.
Many people thing the system of having pressure groups complements a representative democracy because surely the right to join groups is a mark of a free society. Many people think minority voices are generally unheeded; pressure groups mean that these minorities can be heard more effectively an example of this is the pressure group Gay lib.
Another positive thing about pressure groups of that they encourage political participation. In a country where the number of people who vote is going down, pressure groups allow people to become more politically aware especially those under the age of eighteen. This means more people will use their votes - something which is surely good for representative democracy.
However some people argue that pressure groups are not good for democracy. They say that the government has its own agenda and won’t act as a referee for all the pressure groups. they say that although pressure groups may be considered they likely to be ignored if they do not conform with the government. Pro-pluralists come back and this argument by saying that the amount of forces acting on each other from different pressure groups will mean that everyone has an input and public policy is a happy medium. They point out that for every group there is an apposing pressure group for instance campaign for state education versus private education lobby.
Anti-pluralists also argue that pressure groups are unelected and unrepresentative so how can they possibly be good for representative democracy. The pressure groups may not be representative of their members and their officers are not usually elected. Furthermore many Marxists say that pressure groups are just a tool used by the elite distract the population from seriously challenging them politically. They say the elite (the government) make the population believes that they can make a difference using pressure groups when this is not the case. They point out that pressure groups only normally succeed when government policy is in their favour and that the government only does what it wants to and doesn’t take a balanced view point.
To conclude I think that pressure groups play an important part in our representative democracy. There allow people to participate between elections, and they allow minority voices to be heard. However pressure groups shouldn’t be the be all and end all as certain parts of them detract from a representative democracy. For instance there an elected and the government houses and agenda.
By Hannah Gray
