Democratic representation and democratic sanctions

REFERENCES

• Benhabib, Seyla. 2004. The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents and Citizens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Mark B. 2006. Survey article: citizen panels and the concept of representation. Journal of Political Philosophy 14: 203–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2006.00245.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castiglione, Dario and Mark E. Warren. 2013. A new ecology of democratic representation? Eight theoretical issues. Rivista di Storia delle Idee 2: 155–72.
   Google Scholar
• Christiano, Thomas. 2008. The Constitution of Equality: Democratic Authority and Its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Curato, Nicole, Dryzek John S., Ercan Selen A., Hendriks Carolyn M. and Niemeyer Simon. 2017. Twelve key findings in deliberative democracy research. Daedalus 146: 28–38. doi: 10.1162/DAED_a_00444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Disch, Lisa. 2011. Toward a mobilization conception of democratic representation. American Political Science Review 105: 100–14. doi: 10.1017/S0003055410000602
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DOVI, SUZANNE. 2002. Preferable descriptive representatives: Will just any woman, black, or latino do? American Political Science Review 96: 729–43.
   Google Scholar
• Dovi, Suzanne. 2007. The Good Representative. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Fishkin, Jeremy. 2009. When the People Speak. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fung, Archon. 2004. Empowered Participation: Reinventing Urban Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fung, Archon. 2005. Deliberation before the revolution: towards an ethics of deliberative democracy in an unjust world. Political Theory 33: 397–419. doi: 10.1177/0090591704271990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fung, Archon. 2013. The principle of affected interests: an interpretation and defense. In Representation: Elections and Beyond, edited by Jack Nagel and Rogers Smith. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 236–68.
   Google Scholar
• Gargarella, Roberto. 2003. The last resort: the right to resistance in situations of legal alienation. SELA Papers, Paper 23. Available at http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yls_sela/23.
   Google Scholar
• GIGER, NATHALIE and ZOE, LEFKORIDI. 2016. Alignment of objectives between parties and their electors: the role of personal issue salience in political representation. In Political Representation: Roles, representatives and the represented, edited by Marc Buhlmann and Jan Fivaz. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 135–51.
   Google Scholar
• Ginsburg T., Daniel Lansberg-Rodriguez and Mila Versteeg. 2013. When to overthrow your government: the right to resist in the world’s constitutions. UCLA Law Review 60: 1186–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodin, Robert. 1980. Manipulatory Politics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodin, Robert. 2007. Enfranchising all affected interests, and its alternatives. Philosophy and Public Affairs 35: 40–68. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2007.00098.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gould, Carol. 2006. Self-determination beyond sovereignty: relating transnational democracy to local autonomy. Journal of Social Philosophy 37: 44–60. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9833.2006.00302.x
   Google Scholar
• Gutmann, Amy and Dennis Thompson. 2004. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, Jurgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms. Trans. W. Regh. Cambridge MA: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, Lawrence. 2014. Freedom Is Power: Liberty Through Political Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, Lawrence. 2017. Representation Needs Resistance. Representation 53: 81–95. doi: 10.1080/00344893.2017.1346874
   Google Scholar
• Kaufmann A. 1985–86. Small scale right to resist. New England Law Review 21: 571–80.
   Google Scholar
• Kuyper, Jonathan W. 2016. Systemic representation: democracy, deliberation, and nonelectoral representatives. American Political Science Review 110: 308–24. doi: 10.1017/S0003055416000095
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefevere, JONAS, STEFAAN, WALGRAVE, and MICHIEL, NUYTEMANS. 2017. Studying the voter-party match: congruence and incongruence between voters and parties. In Political Representation: Roles, Representatives and the Represented, edited by Marc Buhlmann and Jan Fivaz. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 152–69.
   Google Scholar
• Lupia, Arthur and Anne Norton. 2017. Inequality is always in the room: language and power in deliberative democracy. Daedalus 146: 64–76. doi: 10.1162/DAED_a_00447
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manin, Bernard. 1997. The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Manion, Melanie. 2015. Information for Autocrats: Representation in Chinese Local Congresses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• MANSBRIDGE, JANE. 1999. Should blacks represent blacks and women represent women? A contingent “yes.” Journal of Politics 61: 628–57.
   Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, Jane. 2003. Rethinking representation. American Political Science Review 97: 515–28. doi: 10.1017/S0003055403000856
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, Jane. 2009. A ‘selection model’ of political representation. Journal of Political Philosophy 17: 369–98. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00337.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, Jane. 2011. Clarifying the concept of representation. American Political Science Review 105: 621–30. doi: 10.1017/S0003055411000189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montanaro, Laura. 2012. The democratic legitimacy of self-appointed representatives. Journal of Politics 74: 1094–107. doi: 10.1017/S0022381612000515
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Näsström, Sofia. 2007. The legitimacy of the people. Political Theory 35: 624–58. doi: 10.1177/0090591707304951
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Näsström, Sofia. 2011. The challenge of the all-affected principle. Political Studies 59: 116–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00845.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Näsström, Sofia. 2015. Democratic representation beyond election. Constellations 22: 1–12. doi: 10.1111/1467-8675.12123
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Pensky, Max. 2007. Two cheers for cosmopolitanism: cosmopolitan solidarity as second-order inclusion. Journal of Social Philosophy 38: 165–84. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9833.2007.00372.x
   Google Scholar
• Pitkin, Hanna. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Plotke, David. 1997. Representation is democracy. Constellations 4:19–34. doi: 10.1111/1467-8675.00033
   Google Scholar
• Rawls, John. 2005. Political Liberalism: Extended Version. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rehfeld, Andrew. 2006. Towards a general theory of political representation. Journal of Politics 68: 1–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00365.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• REHFELD, ANDREW. 2009. Representation rethought: on trustees, delegates, and gyroscopes in the study of political representation and democracy. American Political Science Review 103: 214–30.
   Google Scholar
• Rehfeld, Andrew. 2011. The concepts of representation. American Political Science Review 105: 631–41. doi: 10.1017/S0003055411000190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• REHFELD, Andrew. 2018. On representing. Journal of Political Philosophy 26: 216–39. doi: 10.1111/jopp.12137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runciman, David. 2007. The paradox of political representation. Journal of Political Philosophy 15: 93–114. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2007.00266.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saward, Michael. 2009. Authorisation and authenticity: representation and the unelected. Journal of Political Philosophy 17: 1–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00309.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saward, Michael. 2010. The Representative Claim. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Severs, Eline. 2010. Representation as claims-making. Quid responsiveness? Representation 46: 411–23. doi: 10.1080/00344893.2010.518081
   Google Scholar
• Shapiro, Ian. 2017. Collusion in restraint of democracy: against political deliberation. Daedalus 146: 77–84. doi: 10.1162/DAED_a_00448
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skirbekk, Gunnar. 1997. The discourse principle and those affected. Inquiry 40: 63–71. doi: 10.1080/00201749708602438
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Squires, Judith. 2008. The constitutive representation of gender: extra-parliamentary re-presentation of gender relations. Representation 44: 187–204. doi: 10.1080/00344890802080464
   Google Scholar
• Syntomer, Yves, C. Herzberg and A. Röcke. 2008. Participatory budgeting in Europe: potentials and challenges. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 32: 164–78. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00777.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Syntomer, Yves. 2010. The Power to the People. Citizen juries, Random Selection and Participative Democracy. Exeter: Imprint Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Urbinati, Nadia. 2000. Representation as advocacy: a study of democratic deliberation. Political Theory 28:758–86. doi: 10.1177/0090591700028006003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urbinati, Nadia. 2006. Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Urbinati, Nadia and Mark E. Warren. 2008. The concept of representation in contemporary democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science 11: 387–412. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053006.190533
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren, Mark E. and Hilary Pearse. 2009. Designing deliberative democracy: the British Columbia citizens’ assembly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• White, Stuart. 2017. Parliaments, constitutional conventions, and popular sovereignty. British Journal of Politics and International Relations. doi: 10.1177/1369148117700657. Online March 30, 2017.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolin, Sheldon. 1982. What revolutionary action means today. Democracy 4: 17–28.
   Google Scholar
• Young, Iris Marion. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zurn, Christopher. 2007. Deliberative Democracy and the Institutions of Judicial Review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar