Democratic Representation and the Constituency Paradox

That acts of democratic representation participate in creating the interests for which legislators and other officials purport merely to stand gives rise to the “constituency paradox.” I elucidate this paradox through a critical reading of Hanna Pitkin's The Concept of Representation, together...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Perspectives on politics 2012-09, Vol.10 (3), p.599-616
1. Verfasser: Disch, Lisa
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 616
container_issue 3
container_start_page 599
container_title Perspectives on politics
container_volume 10
creator Disch, Lisa
description That acts of democratic representation participate in creating the interests for which legislators and other officials purport merely to stand gives rise to the “constituency paradox.” I elucidate this paradox through a critical reading of Hanna Pitkin's The Concept of Representation, together with her classic study of the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, Wittgenstein and Justice. Pitkin's core insight into democratic representation is that democratic representation is “quasi-performative”: an activity that mobilizes constituencies by the interests it claims in their name. I develop this insight together with its implications for contemporary scholarship on the political effects of economic equality. I conclude by arguing that the fundamental democratic deficiency of the US political system goes much deeper than its disproportionate responsiveness to wealthy interests; it is a matter of system biases that foster the formation and expression of those interests, while mitigating against mobilization by those Americans who want inequality to be reduced.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S1537592712001636
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1284061753</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1537592712001636</cupid><jstor_id>23260181</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>23260181</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c453t-6a993b75b55f7c8fdeefb28b9cc541ff512c0722ab6a292317c118f1a3a07e083</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkEtLxDAQx4souK5-AA9CwYuXambSPHqU9QmC4uNc0jTRLttmTVJwv70tu4gogqeZYX7__zyS5BDIKRAQZ0_AqGAFCkBCgFO-lUyA5ZCRQvLtMaciG_u7yV4Ic0IQKZGThF-Y1mmvYqPTR7P0JpguDpXrUtXVaXwz6cx1ITaxN51epQ_Kq9p97Cc7Vi2COdjEafJydfk8u8nu7q9vZ-d3mc4ZjRlXRUErwSrGrNDS1sbYCmVVaD3sZi0D1EQgqoorLJCC0ADSgqKKCEMknSYna9-ld--9CbFsm6DNYqE64_pQAsqccBCM_gNFyIEgjOjxD3Tuet8Nh5RAKGW8IBwHCtaU9i4Eb2y59E2r_GqAyvHp5a-nD5qjtWYeovNfAqTICUgY-nTjqdrKN_Wr-T76L9dPvymK6Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1033569062</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Democratic Representation and the Constituency Paradox</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Disch, Lisa</creator><creatorcontrib>Disch, Lisa</creatorcontrib><description>That acts of democratic representation participate in creating the interests for which legislators and other officials purport merely to stand gives rise to the “constituency paradox.” I elucidate this paradox through a critical reading of Hanna Pitkin's The Concept of Representation, together with her classic study of the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, Wittgenstein and Justice. Pitkin's core insight into democratic representation is that democratic representation is “quasi-performative”: an activity that mobilizes constituencies by the interests it claims in their name. I develop this insight together with its implications for contemporary scholarship on the political effects of economic equality. I conclude by arguing that the fundamental democratic deficiency of the US political system goes much deeper than its disproportionate responsiveness to wealthy interests; it is a matter of system biases that foster the formation and expression of those interests, while mitigating against mobilization by those Americans who want inequality to be reduced.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1537-5927</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1541-0986</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1537592712001636</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Citizen participation ; Constituencies ; Constituency ; Constituents ; Democracy ; Democratic theory ; Equality ; Income inequality ; Justice ; Legislators ; Mobilization ; Normativity ; Paradoxes ; Philosophers ; Political conflict ; Political parties ; Political pluralism ; Political representation ; Political science ; Political Systems ; Political theory ; Radicalism ; Representation ; Scholarship ; U.S.A</subject><ispartof>Perspectives on politics, 2012-09, Vol.10 (3), p.599-616</ispartof><rights>Copyright © American Political Science Association 2012</rights><rights>American Political Science Association 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c453t-6a993b75b55f7c8fdeefb28b9cc541ff512c0722ab6a292317c118f1a3a07e083</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c453t-6a993b75b55f7c8fdeefb28b9cc541ff512c0722ab6a292317c118f1a3a07e083</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/23260181$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1537592712001636/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,803,12845,27924,27925,55628,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Disch, Lisa</creatorcontrib><title>Democratic Representation and the Constituency Paradox</title><title>Perspectives on politics</title><description>That acts of democratic representation participate in creating the interests for which legislators and other officials purport merely to stand gives rise to the “constituency paradox.” I elucidate this paradox through a critical reading of Hanna Pitkin's The Concept of Representation, together with her classic study of the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, Wittgenstein and Justice. Pitkin's core insight into democratic representation is that democratic representation is “quasi-performative”: an activity that mobilizes constituencies by the interests it claims in their name. I develop this insight together with its implications for contemporary scholarship on the political effects of economic equality. I conclude by arguing that the fundamental democratic deficiency of the US political system goes much deeper than its disproportionate responsiveness to wealthy interests; it is a matter of system biases that foster the formation and expression of those interests, while mitigating against mobilization by those Americans who want inequality to be reduced.</description><subject>Citizen participation</subject><subject>Constituencies</subject><subject>Constituency</subject><subject>Constituents</subject><subject>Democracy</subject><subject>Democratic theory</subject><subject>Equality</subject><subject>Income inequality</subject><subject>Justice</subject><subject>Legislators</subject><subject>Mobilization</subject><subject>Normativity</subject><subject>Paradoxes</subject><subject>Philosophers</subject><subject>Political conflict</subject><subject>Political parties</subject><subject>Political pluralism</subject><subject>Political representation</subject><subject>Political science</subject><subject>Political Systems</subject><subject>Political theory</subject><subject>Radicalism</subject><subject>Representation</subject><subject>Scholarship</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><issn>1537-5927</issn><issn>1541-0986</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkEtLxDAQx4souK5-AA9CwYuXambSPHqU9QmC4uNc0jTRLttmTVJwv70tu4gogqeZYX7__zyS5BDIKRAQZ0_AqGAFCkBCgFO-lUyA5ZCRQvLtMaciG_u7yV4Ic0IQKZGThF-Y1mmvYqPTR7P0JpguDpXrUtXVaXwz6cx1ITaxN51epQ_Kq9p97Cc7Vi2COdjEafJydfk8u8nu7q9vZ-d3mc4ZjRlXRUErwSrGrNDS1sbYCmVVaD3sZi0D1EQgqoorLJCC0ADSgqKKCEMknSYna9-ld--9CbFsm6DNYqE64_pQAsqccBCM_gNFyIEgjOjxD3Tuet8Nh5RAKGW8IBwHCtaU9i4Eb2y59E2r_GqAyvHp5a-nD5qjtWYeovNfAqTICUgY-nTjqdrKN_Wr-T76L9dPvymK6Q</recordid><startdate>20120901</startdate><enddate>20120901</enddate><creator>Disch, Lisa</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120901</creationdate><title>Democratic Representation and the Constituency Paradox</title><author>Disch, Lisa</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c453t-6a993b75b55f7c8fdeefb28b9cc541ff512c0722ab6a292317c118f1a3a07e083</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Citizen participation</topic><topic>Constituencies</topic><topic>Constituency</topic><topic>Constituents</topic><topic>Democracy</topic><topic>Democratic theory</topic><topic>Equality</topic><topic>Income inequality</topic><topic>Justice</topic><topic>Legislators</topic><topic>Mobilization</topic><topic>Normativity</topic><topic>Paradoxes</topic><topic>Philosophers</topic><topic>Political conflict</topic><topic>Political parties</topic><topic>Political pluralism</topic><topic>Political representation</topic><topic>Political science</topic><topic>Political Systems</topic><topic>Political theory</topic><topic>Radicalism</topic><topic>Representation</topic><topic>Scholarship</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Disch, Lisa</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Perspectives on politics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Disch, Lisa</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Democratic Representation and the Constituency Paradox</atitle><jtitle>Perspectives on politics</jtitle><date>2012-09-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>599</spage><epage>616</epage><pages>599-616</pages><issn>1537-5927</issn><eissn>1541-0986</eissn><abstract>That acts of democratic representation participate in creating the interests for which legislators and other officials purport merely to stand gives rise to the “constituency paradox.” I elucidate this paradox through a critical reading of Hanna Pitkin's The Concept of Representation, together with her classic study of the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, Wittgenstein and Justice. Pitkin's core insight into democratic representation is that democratic representation is “quasi-performative”: an activity that mobilizes constituencies by the interests it claims in their name. I develop this insight together with its implications for contemporary scholarship on the political effects of economic equality. I conclude by arguing that the fundamental democratic deficiency of the US political system goes much deeper than its disproportionate responsiveness to wealthy interests; it is a matter of system biases that foster the formation and expression of those interests, while mitigating against mobilization by those Americans who want inequality to be reduced.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S1537592712001636</doi><tpages>18</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1537-5927
ispartof Perspectives on politics, 2012-09, Vol.10 (3), p.599-616
issn 1537-5927
1541-0986
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1284061753
source Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete
subjects Citizen participation
Constituencies
Constituency
Constituents
Democracy
Democratic theory
Equality
Income inequality
Justice
Legislators
Mobilization
Normativity
Paradoxes
Philosophers
Political conflict
Political parties
Political pluralism
Political representation
Political science
Political Systems
Political theory
Radicalism
Representation
Scholarship
U.S.A
title Democratic Representation and the Constituency Paradox
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T15%3A56%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Democratic%20Representation%20and%20the%20Constituency%20Paradox&rft.jtitle=Perspectives%20on%20politics&rft.au=Disch,%20Lisa&rft.date=2012-09-01&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=599&rft.epage=616&rft.pages=599-616&rft.issn=1537-5927&rft.eissn=1541-0986&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1537592712001636&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E23260181%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1033569062&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1537592712001636&rft_jstor_id=23260181&rfr_iscdi=true