EVALUATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS IN TERMS OF TYPES OF DEMOCRACY

Öz

The development of democracy has followed an up and down course in the historical process. Democracy, which was initiated with the practices seen in Ancient Greece, has always maintained its importance as an ideal form of government aimed to be achieved in human history. Civil society, on the other hand, has a history at least as important and deep-rooted as democracy. Civil society is an organised structuring effort that emerges through the relations developed among people outside the sphere of state activity. There is a mutual and positive relationship between democracy and civil society. This is supported by both academic studies and various practices. The aim of this study is to evaluate the relationship between democracy and civil society through different types of democracy. In this context, the views of representative democracy, direct democracy, liberal democracy, participatory democracy and authoritarian democracy on civil society and the impact of civil society on different types of democracy are analysed. The study argues that civil society has different degrees of importance for different types of democracy but is indispensable for the development of democracy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Civil society
• Representative Democracy
• Direct Democracy
• Liberal Democracy
• Participatory Democracy
• Authoritarian Democracy

DEMOKRASİ VE SİVİL TOPLUM İLİŞKİSİNİN DEMOKRASİ TÜRLERİ AÇISINDAN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Demokrasinin gelişimi tarihsel süreç içinde inişli çıkışlı bir seyir izlemiştir. Antik Yunan’da görülen uygulamalarla başlatılan demokrasi, insanlık tarihinde ulaşılması hedeflenen bir ideal yönetim biçimi olarak önemini her zaman korumuştur. Öte yandan sivil toplum ise en az demokrasi kadar önemli ve köklü bir geçmişe sahiptir. Sivil toplum, devletin faaliyet alanı dışında insanların kendi aralarında geliştirdikleri ilişkilerle ortaya çıkan örgütlü bir yapılanma çabasıdır. Demokrasi ve sivil toplum arasında karşılıklı ve olumlu bir ilişki kurulmaktadır. Bu durum hem akademik çalışmalarla hem de çeşitli uygulamalarla desteklenmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, demokrasi ile sivil toplum arasındaki ilişkiyi demokrasinin farklı türleri üzerinden değerlendirmeye çalışmaktır. Bu kapsamda temsili demokrasi, doğrudan demokrasi, liberal demokrasi, katılımcı demokrasi ve otoriter demokrasi türlerinin sivil topluma bakışı ve sivil toplumun farklı demokrasi türlerine olan etkisi incelenmektedir. Çalışmada sivil toplumun demokrasinin farklı türleri açısından farklı derecelerde öneme sahip olduğu fakat demokrasinin gelişimi açısından ise vazgeçilmez olduğu görüşü ileri sürülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sivil Toplum
• Temsili Demokrasi
• Doğrudan Demokrasi
• Liberal Demokrasi
• Katılımcı Demokrasi
• Otoriter Demokrasi

Kaynakça

1. Altman, D. (2011). Direct Democracy Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Bütçe Senin İstanbul (2025). https://butcesenin.istanbul/
3. Caramani, D. (2023). Comparative Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Carothers, T., ve Barndt, W. (1999). Civil Society. Foreign Policy, 117, 18-29.
5. Carothers, T., ve Brechenmacher, S. (2014). Closing Space: Democracy and Human Rights Support Under Fire. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
6. Carothers, T., ve Brechenmacher, S. (2018). Civil Society Under Assault: Repression and Responses. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
7. Cohen, J. L., ve Arato, A. (1992). Civil Society and Political Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.
8. Çaha, Ö. (2012). Demokrasi. H. Çetin (Ed.). Siyaset Bilimi içinde (s. 223-268), Ankara: Orion Yayınları.

9. Çukurçayır, M. A. (2012). Siyasal Katılma ve Yerel Demokrasi, Konya: Çizgi Kitabevi.
10. Dahl, R. A. (1991). Democracy and Its Critics. London: Yale University Press.
11. Dahl, R. A. (2006). On Democracy. London: Yale University Press.
12. Diamond, L. (1994). Rethinking Civil Society: Toward Democratic Consolidation. Journal of Democracy, 5(3), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1994.0041
13. Diamond, L. (1999). Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
14. Diamond, L. (2015). Facing up to The Democratic Recession. Journal of Democracy, 26(1), 141-155. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2015.0010
15. Dupuy, K., Ron, J., ve Prakash, A. (2015). Who Survived? Ethiopia’s Regulatory Crackdown on Foreign-funded NGOs. Review of International Political Economy, 22(2), 419-456.
16. Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
17. Edwards, M. (2014). Civil Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
18. Fung, A., ve Wright, E. O. (2001). Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. Politics & Society, 29(1), 5-41.
19. Gamble, A. (2016). Can the Welfare State Survive? Cambridge: Polity Press.
20. Gaventa, J., (2006), Triumph, Deficit or Contestation: Deepening the ‘Deepening Democracy’ Debate. Working Paper 264, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton: IDS.
21. Gülsever, M. S., Felek, B., Bahtiyar, E. ve Gezici, A. (2023). Türkiye’de Çoğulcu Demokrasi ve Katılımcı Yönetim. International Journal Of Social, Humanities and Administrative Sciences, 9(70), 3866-3875. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/JOSH AS.73063
22. Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of The Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
23. He, B., ve Warren, M. (2011). Authoritarian Deliberation: The Deliberative Turn in Chinese Political Development. Perspective on Politics, 9(2), 269-289.
24. Held, D. (2006). Models of Democracy (3rd ed.). Redwood City: Stanford University Press.
25. Heywood, A. (2016). Siyaset. B. B. Özipek, B. Seçilmişoğlu, A. Yayla ve H. Y. Başdemir (Çev.). Ankara: Adres Yayınları.
26. Howard, P. N., ve Hussain, M. M. (2013). Democracy’s fourth wave? Digital media and the Arab Spring. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. Keane, J. (1998). Civil Society: Old Images, New Visions. Redwood City: Stanford University Press.
28. Keane, J. (2009). The Life and Death of Democracy. New York: Simon and Schuster.
29. Kymlicka, W. (2002). Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30. Levitsky, S., ve Way, L. A. (2010). Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-six Countries. London: Yale University Press.
32. Öztekin, A. (2018). Siyaset Bilimine Giriş. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
33. Pateman, C. (2012). Participatory Democracy Revisited. Perspectives on Politics, 10(1), 7-19.
34. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
35. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster. https://doi.org/10.1145/358916.361990
36. Rawls, J. (2005). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
37. Sahoo, S. (2013). Civil Society and Democratization in India: Institutions, Ideologies and Interests. London: Routledge.
38. Salamon, L. M. (1994). The Rise of The Nonprofit Sector. Foreign Affairs, 73(4), 109-122.
39. Saward, M. (2020). Democratic Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40. Schedler, A. (2006). The Logic of Electoral Authoritarianism. In A. Schedler (Ed.), Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition (pp. 1–23). Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
41. Skocpol, T. (2013). Diminished Democracy: From Membership to Management in American Civic Life. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
42. Smith, D. A., ve Tolbert, C. J. (2016). Educated By Initiative: The Effects of Direct Democracy on Citizens and Political Organizations in The American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
43. Smith, J. (2020). Environmental Movements and Democracy. Global Environmental Politics, 20(1), 72-91.
44. Tilly, C. (2004). Social Movements, 1768-2004. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
45. Topçuoğlu, E. (2023). ‘Sivil’ ve ‘demokratik’ Bir Sivil Toplum Nasıl Mümkün Olabilir?, Marmara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 97-119. Doi: 10.14782marmarasbd.1197794
46. Tosun, G. E. & Tepeciklioğlu, E. E. (2012). Sivil Toplum ve Baskı Grupları, H. Çetin (Ed.). Siyaset Bilimi içinde (s. 393-431), Ankara: Orion Yayınları.
47. Turan, E. (2014). Siyaset Bilimine Giriş. Konya: Palet Yayınları.
48. Wampler, B. (2007). Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, Cooperation, and Accountability. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
49. Wampler, B., ve Avritzer, L. (2004). Participatory Publics: Civil Society and New Institutions in Democratic Brazil. Comparative Politics, 36(3), 291-312.
50. Warren, M. E. (2001). Democracy and Association. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
51. Yılmaz, A. (2016). Çağdaş Siyasal Akımlar. İstanbul: Vadi Yayınları.