2024-03-24 19:12:31 UTC

I don’t feel as though pressure groups enhance democracy. This is due to the fact that they’re very elitist in appointing a leader. This means that the leaders of these pressure groups are often of a high societal class or have a high income. This inhibits their ability to see issues from the perspective of a common citizen that is regularly of a middle or working class. For example the leader of Greenpeace UK, Areeba Hamid, makes £95,400. This is 2.7x the average annual salary in the UK, displaying the extent to which the leaders of these pressure groups are of an inflated income that may distort their ability to level with the concerns with the groups members not being able to take into account more every day concerns about the climate like its effects on people’s day to day instead of trying to get large nations to not produce any emissions as this is unrealistic and doesn’t often result in much real change.

2024-03-27 07:23:10 UTC

Pressure groups are a way of enhancing democracy. The UK over the last few years has hit a massive wall and has been through what’s called a “participation crisis” but the concept of pressure groups allow us to change that. Pressure groups give us more of a chance to have some form of participation in politics. For example, according to the Guardian, over 1 in 10 UK adults are part of an environmental group. These figures are upstanding especially when you compare it to the number adults who are a part of a political group. Only around 1% of the population are members of a political party. This shows how pressure groups give a chance for everyone to participate in politics as much more people are involved in them than they are with parties. This is significant as it shows how it enhances democracy by making sure everyone is taking part and everyone’s issues can be addressed. However, pressure groups can be extremely undemocratic at times. Pressure groups may have a strict criteria to determine who really belongs in those pressure groups and their cause can be very specific meaning that only a small chunk of people can participate. These are called interest groups, so for example The British Medical Association which is focused on promoting the interests of doctors and health professionals. This is significant as it means that many pressure groups have a very sectional view meaning that many others can’t join them. This is significant because it puts the participation pressure groups provide into question as many of them have very specific entry requirements. Overall, this shows that pressure groups do enhance democracy. Although it can be argued that they’re undemocratic and can be difficult to enter, they still provide far better participation than political parties which means we can get a wider and more representative view.

Do pressure groups enhance democracy by Mrs C Smith