Abstract:

The classical understanding of democracy has been criticized on the grounds that it does not reflect the practical functioning of modern democracy and is unrealistic. Many theorists have attempted to develop a realistic theory of modern democracy based on empiricism. These writers, who are generally referred to as theorists of democratic elitism, argued that the elites are the dominant element in democracies, not the people or will of the majority. Based on empirical research; they argued that the public is uninterested, uninformed, irrational, short-sighted, self- interested when it comes to political issues, and has a more negative view of rights, freedoms and democracy than the elite. Based on the issue of scale and the research implications mentioned, they argued that elites have a fundamental place and a vital role in democracies. They concluded that representative democracy, and therefore elites make democracy possible in modern society. For the establishment and stability of liberal democracies; they argued that the elites should have a voluntary consensus on the basic rules and values of democracy, that there should be multiple elites instead of a single integrated elite, that the elites should compete for the votes of the electorate in order to take office, that the elites should have partially autonomy from their constituents and that the elites should have particular qualifications in terms of morality and competence.

Keywords: