Democratic Representation and Decision-making at the Time of Digital Disintermediation: A Critique of the Populist Erosion of the Role of Parliaments

Several authors have analyzed the rise of populist movements around the world as a phenomenon that must be seen in the context of a general transformation of representative democracy into a form of audience democracy, in which the value of intermediation is increasingly contested at all levels of social life. In examining this ongoing shift, we first illustrate some general implications that social phenomena of disintermediation have for the practice of representative democracy by thinning and reshaping the boundaries between the formal and informal public spheres. Specifically, we examine the growing influence of charismatic leadership in party politics and the push for digital direct democracy as an alternative to the role of elected assemblies, to show how a normative ideal of political representation as a real-time mirroring of public opinion underpins both of these populist strategies. We then critically assess these practical and theoretical implications of disintermediation. From a practical perspective, we find that charismatic leaderships and direct digital democracy populist strategies do not meet the standards of immediacy and transparency on which they are based, and cannot replace the pluralistic democratic function of elected assemblies. From a theoretical perspective, we argue that the conceptual premise on which they rely is fundamentally flawed: political representation is a process that always involves a relevant degree of interpretation and intermediation, and therefore representative claims cannot be construed as mirror reflections of the represented. We conclude by suggesting that parliaments should instead adopt innovative practices such as public hearings and citizen-initiated direct democracy, which refocus the representative function of the assembly on the active listening of the representatives and the participation of the represented.