{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024549918166939442, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0016366612111292963, 'mean_word_length': 5.646739130434782, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State

decline of juries, which a more institutional account has the potential to provide. Finally, Dzur’s analysis of the declining role of juries and plea for an expanded role based on theories of participatory democracy raises important questions about participatory solutions to right-wing populism more generally. The call for more responsible citizen-driven institutions is a politically important one. For political scientists, are citizen initiative processes leading to policies such as California’s Proposition 13 and Colorado’s Tax Payers’ Bill of Rights properly called “direct democracy,” given Dzur’s analysis? How might these arguments help us engage Tea Party anti-government positions, given Dzur’s counter that political solutions lie with more citizen participation rather than technocracy? Dzur’s conception of rational disorganization leads us to think about responses involving the importance of organizing and citizen activism in relation to institutions. A good book is one that raises bigger questions than it begins with, and Albert Dzur’s Punishment, Participatory Democracy, & the Jury clearly is such a book, finely written and full of interesting arguments.