Democracy is in deep crisis today: this is indicated by decreasing turnout at elections, media that blur the distinction between information, defamation and propaganda, and the hidden influence of business corporations through tax evasion and lobbyism (Barber 1994; Crouch 2004; Preiss/Brunner 2013; Merkel 2015). In this situation, direct democracy seems to offer a new way to strengthen citizens’ political participation. However, several recent referenda have shown that the former can be used by the elites as an instrument for advancing their ambitions to power, and legitimating specific (often problematic) political aims. This paper uses a theoretically informed historical-sociological approach with the intent of explaining elites’ attitudes toward democracy. I start from democratic elite theory, which argues that elites are indispensable for the management of large and complex societies, but that they will pursue their own interests if not checked by a strong opposition and civic action from below. Six concrete hypotheses are developed: Direct democracy increases in the course of realizing democratic systems; elites are much more sceptical concerning direct democracy than citizens; the use and implementation of referenda depend on the political system (distinguishing three types); and the dysfunctions of direct democracy are mainly due to its misuse by elites, while the outcomes of strong direct democracy are mostly positive. These hypotheses are tested by looking at applications of direct democracy (referenda) in totalitarian, authoritarian and elitist democratic systems in recent European history. The paper concludes with some considerations about the necessary measures for solving the problems of direct democracy as articulated by the elites.

中文翻译：

---

直接民主——赋予公民权力还是精英的工具？

民主在今天深陷危机：选举投票率下降，媒体模糊信息、诽谤和宣传之间的区别，以及商业公司通过逃税和游说的隐藏影响力都表明了这一点（Barber 1994；Crouch 2004；Preiss/Brunner 2013 年；默克尔，2015 年）。在这种情况下，直接民主似乎提供了一种加强公民政治参与的新途径。然而，最近的几次公投表明，前者可以被精英用作推进他们的权力野心的工具，并使特定的（通常有问题的）政治目标合法化。本文使用了一种理论上知情的历史社会学方法，旨在解释精英对民主的态度。我从民主精英理论开始，它认为精英对于管理庞大而复杂的社会是必不可少的，但如果不受来自下层的强烈反对和公民行动的制约，他们就会追求自己的利益。提出六个具体假设： 直接民主在民主制度实现过程中增加；与公民相比，精英们对直接民主的怀疑程度要高得多；公民投票的使用和实施取决于政治制度（区分三种类型）；而直接民主的失灵主要是由于精英滥用，而强直接民主的结果大多是积极的。这些假设通过考察欧洲近代历史上直接民主（公投）在极权主义、威权主义和精英主义民主制度中的应用来检验。