Democracy, Inequality and Minorities

12^th Swiss Summer School on Democracy Studies

Democracy, Inequality and Minorities

Université de Genève
22-26 June 2026

A major issue in democratic theory and practice is the existence of persistent minorities. Prominent examples include ethnic, linguistic, religious, and geographic minorities, but also citizens whose voices hardly count in elections or referendums because their ideological attitudes repeatedly place them on the losing side of majority decisions.

Given that equality is the grounding and guiding principle of democracy—and hence its core normative promises are the fair treatment of all, coupled with the protection of individual liberties—then we have a problem if groups of citizens, due to their identity traits and/or ideological convictions, are systematically disadvantaged. This concerns both the input and output dimensions of democracy. Consider, for example, the problem of inequalities due to low turnout (both in elections and in referendums) or the existence of electoral discrimination (i.e., when majority voters discriminate against candidates from minority groups). On the output side, majority decisions in referendums can have a negative impact on minorities, whereas their poor descriptive representation as a result of elections typically has a negative impact on their substantive representation and the quality of political decisions.

Through the prism of the role of minorities in a democracy, the 2026 Democracy Summer School explores these issues by examining not only their causes and consequences, but also the institutional design tools (e.g. federalism, electoral system reforms, deliberative minipublics) that can enhance the equality promise of democratic rule.

SCIENTIFIC COMMITEE
Nathalie Giger, University of Geneva
Nenad Stojanović, University of Geneva

PROGRAMME

 Monday 22
   Keynote Lecture

   Shaun Bowler University of California, Riverside (UC Riverside)
   What does Populism tell us about liberal Democarcy and minority rights? 

It is not surprising that Populism – and especially right-wing Populism - has consequences for the treatment of racial and ethnic minorities. It is also the case that Populism has consequences for our understanding of support for democratic norms and values which has special relevance for minorities. Support for Populism also implies support for a ‘thin’ version of democratic practice in which majority rule is the central defining element and other aspects of liberal democratic practice – independent judiciary and press as well as minority rights – are not considered. While reformers often see direct democracy as a democratic innovation that will help revitalize Western democracy, Populists often support direct democracy as an expression of majority rule. Populist support for majority rule thus raises long standing fears about the dangers of direct democracy. More troubling, perhaps, is that the Populist ‘thin’ version of democratic practice is one which is shared by those who, themselves, are not necessarily supporters of Populist policies. That is, the Populist model of democratic practice is one that highlights the relatively weak support for liberal democracy among the population more generally.  In fact, support for broader liberal democracy is, itself, a minority opinion.  

Moderated by Pascal Sciarini University of Geneva

Tuesday 23
   Panel 1

   Timofey Agarin Queen’s University Belfast
Interrelations between the majority and the minority in multi-ethnic states

Lay discussants of approaches to management of ethnic diversity in democratic states tend to take for granted the power of institutional arrangements that entrench intergroup inequality in democratic institutions, consolidate hierarchies, and benchmark societal change on the pathway towards elite-centred decision- and policy-making. Oftentimes, the solutions to challenges of ethnically diverse societies have focused on ethnofederal arrangements; at others – on broader political powersharing; in all contexts, however, accommodation of non-dominant groups has rarely challenged the underlying aspiration of democratic states to remain nation-states.

Yet, in this session, we will discuss why many approaches focussing on state institutions in ethnically diverse societies fall short of expectations to consolidate democratic institutions and inoculate publics against exclusivist ideologies, e.g. jingoism, nationalism, populism among others. In the past two decades a range of countries demonstrated that not only the design of political institutions, but also how these are being understood by publics they serve determines the degree of intergroup peace and political stability. Two interpretations hold place in the context: on the one hand, ethnic domination over a territorial entity seems to ensure continuation of intergroup competition even in the face of inclusive political institutions; on the other, failure to ensure consistent check and balances that result in turn-around of segmental elites complicates pathways for adaptation to social change. On both accounts, small groups of elites are expected to hold away over their followers, and over institutions to ensure peace and stability. Intuitively, these claims are accessible: institutional arrangements structure politics in ways that increase the likelihood of dominant political behaviour in elites everywhere, and the elites operating within such institutions are likely to opt in for zero-sum logic of behaviour they have observed as successful in the past. How can institutional arrangements discourage exclusion from political process and usher better representation in diverse societies will be the focus of this session.

Moderated by Nenad Stojanović University of Geneva

Wednesday 24
Panel 2

 Mikael Persson University of Gothenburg
Unequal representation and consequences

The seminar examines the causes and consequences of unequal representation in contemporary democracies, with a focus on income-based inequalities in policy responsiveness. The analysis addresses why the preferences of high-income citizens are more likely to be translated into public policy than those of low-income citizens, even in proportional and multi-party systems. Three mechanisms are highlighted: unequal access and resources that shape which interests are heard; party and coalition strategies that prioritise the preferences of affluent voters; and institutional status quo bias that allows well-resourced groups to block reforms favoured by the poor. The second part of the seminar turns to the consequences of these representational biases. The consequences of unequal representation are analysed in terms of election outcomes, economic policy and performance, and citizens’ satisfaction with democracy. In particular, the seminar asks whether unequal responsiveness changes who wins elections, how governments tax and spend, and when citizens start to view such imbalances as a problem for democratic legitimacy.

Moderated by Jonas Pontusson University of Geneva 

Thursday 25
Panel 3

 Lea Portmann University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland (FHNW)
Electoral discrimination

Discrimination against minorities in politics undermines fundamental democratic principles, such as political representation and political equality. This session will address the issue of discrimination in politics from four perspectives. Firstly, the term 'discrimination' will be defined, with a particular focus on who can be considered a subject of it. Secondly, we will analyse the psychological reasons underlying discrimination in politics. These reasons range from overt hostility to more subtle factors, including unconscious biases and ingroup favouritism. Thirdly, we will examine the manifestation of discrimination against minorities in the processes of accessing political office and power. Our aim is to explore how the actions of aspiring minority candidates, party gatekeepers and voters can either promote the political success of minorities or reinforce and perpetuate discrimination against them. We will pay special attention to the interplay between the various stages of this process and the actors involved. Finally, we will discuss the consequences of discrimination in politics for democracies, as well as possible solutions to address it. These solutions include institutional arrangements, party strategies, and the behaviour and solidarity of citizens.

Moderated by Maxime Walder University of Geneva

Application deadline  28 February 2026.