The current debate on the vitality of affluent democracies often cites the changing patterns of citizens’ political participation as signs of this malaise. Fewer citizens are voting, and more are turning toward contentious and more direct forms of participation. What are the consequences? I describe the participation patterns in affluent democracies and then consider whether these changes in citizen participation are linked to the quality of democratic performance. Some scholars see a more assertive public as overloading the political system or destroying collective views of politics. Others see contentious politics as giving citizens an additional and more effective method of influencing policymakers. The evidence on citizen participation comes from two waves of the International Social Survey Program. Measures of the functioning of government come from the Economist Intelligence Unit and the World Bank. The analyses show that a more active public is correlated with a better functioning government. Moreover, these relationships are stronger for protest and other forms of direct action than for voting in national elections. The results suggest that an assertive and elite-challenging public is more of a boon than a curse for democratic politics.

当前关于富裕民主国家活力的辩论经常引用公民政治参与模式的变化作为这种萎靡不振的迹象。投票的公民越来越少，更多的人转向有争议和更直接的参与形式。后果是什么？我描述了富裕民主国家的参与模式，然后考虑公民参与的这些变化是否与民主绩效的质量有关。一些学者认为，更加自信的公众会使政治体系超载或破坏集体政治观点。其他人则认为有争议的政治为公民提供了一种额外的、更有效的影响政策制定者的方法。公民参与的证据来自两波国际社会调查计划。政府运作的衡量标准来自经济学人智库和世界银行。分析表明，更活跃的公众与更好运作的政府相关。此外，这些关系对于抗议和其他形式的直接行动比在全国选举中投票更牢固。结果表明，对民主政治而言，自信且敢于挑战精英的公众更像是一种恩惠，而非诅咒。