Democracy and Its Critics¶
Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and Its Critics. Yale University Press.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Accountability
- Classical liberal political theory (Locke, Madison), as Dahl (1989) reconstructs in his analysis of democratic critique, elevated accountability as a check against tyranny, embedding it in constitutional separation of powers, regular elections, and the right of petitioning
This sourceTests the foundational assumptions of democratic theory against its critics, treating Madisonian constitutional design and the checking of power as responses to the danger of tyranny.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Dahl does say republican theory made separated institutions a check on tyranny, but the passage is about Montesquieu and republicanism, not Locke or accountability, elections or petitioning.
“It became an axiom of republican theory that the concentration of these three kinds of power in a single center was the very essence of tyranny and that they must therefore be located in separate institutions, each serving as a check on the others”
- Classical liberal political theory (Locke, Madison), as Dahl (1989) reconstructs in his analysis of democratic critique, elevated accountability as a check against tyranny, embedding it in constitutional separation of powers, regular elections, and the right of petitioning
- Checks and Balances
- Each branch of government derives legitimacy from different constituencies or constitutional roles, creating potential conflict when those constituencies' interests diverge—a tension Dahl (1989) examines in his theory of polyarchal democracy.
This sourceTests the foundational assumptions of democratic theory against critiques and recasts polyarchal democracy as the institutional response to legitimacy and constituency conflict among multiple sources of authority.
- Each branch of government derives legitimacy from different constituencies or constitutional roles, creating potential conflict when those constituencies' interests diverge—a tension Dahl (1989) examines in his theory of polyarchal democracy.
- Legitimacy
- Drawing on Weber's foundational typology and Dahl's (1989) democratic-legitimacy framework, the following examples illustrate the multi-source diagnostic pattern.
This sourceTests the foundational assumptions of democratic theory against critiques and recasts polyarchal democracy as the institutional response to legitimacy and constituency conflict among multiple sources of authority.
- Drawing on Weber's foundational typology and Dahl's (1989) democratic-legitimacy framework, the following examples illustrate the multi-source diagnostic pattern.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 3 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:0cf4fa88b9ac · see in the full table