When discussing the health and quality of democracy, political science has robust theories around central building blocks like accountability, responsibility, checks and balances, and other vital parts of a (well) functioning democratic regime. While much can be argued about the relative importance of these concepts theoretically, we still know surprisingly little about what citizens conceptualise as the core aspects of democracy and what constitutes a high-quality democracy in their mind. Building on original survey data that goes beyond asking respondents for their attitudes to pre-established political science concepts, this paper investigates how citizens conceptualise democracy, relate commonly theorised concepts to each other, and integrate ideas that are outside of the political science theory cannon. More specifically, the study analyses the differences between citizens who self-identify as radical or extremist and those who do not, as they seem to relate differently to democracy. The findings from this study provide an important puzzle piece to solving the contradiction between seemingly well-functioning democratic regimes and increasing citizen disenchantment with democracy in practice.
