Pressure groups can be classified into many different types, depending on their ideologies and ambitions. "Insider" and "outsider" are the two main categories to which pressure groups correspond: internal groups are pressure groups that have political influence on the government and work to inform it, external groups are pressure groups excluded from the government that They focus primarily on gaining public approval and informing the public about their problems. Both groups are considered essential in a pluralist society to represent different interests. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay On the one hand, pressure groups strengthen democracy because they allow particular interests and causes to be heard. They are also able to exert influence on public decision-making, for example through the use of protests, meaning the public is able to make more comprehensive decisions on important issues. These issues could then be discussed by the government, for example, ASH had a great influence on government policy relating to cigarette use. In summary, pressure groups allow a wide range of groups, interests, beliefs and ideologies to be taken into account, which is vital in a pluralist democracy. Another reason to argue that pressure groups actually strengthen pluralist democracy is that they help solve the problem of political apathy. . They increase participation and access to the political system as some people may not want to actually make decisions by voting, but rather choose to have their say by joining these pressure groups and discussing important causes/issues in this way. As people join groups with different beliefs and causes, the government has greater access to listening to groups with many different ideologies. An example of a large pressure group that has had a lot of influence and therefore underlines the idea of ​​a pluralist democracy in the UK is Greenpeace, with 130,000 supporters here alone and 2.8 million worldwide. On the other hand, pressure groups weaken pluralist democracy as some groups may have more influence than others. Groups in a higher economic position are obviously able to express their opinions more clearly than groups further down the economic ladder. This is often used to "buy" their power, for example through the use of advertising. Major internal groups such as the British Medical Association have great influence in terms of policy making. This therefore shows that the UK may not have such a pluralistic democracy as if some parties have more influence than others and not all opinions are taken into account/listened to, this could lead to biased decisions by the government. Another argument against pressure groups strengthening democracy is that the government may favor some groups over others. This may be due to the fact that some pressure groups are more electorally advantageous for them. For example, the Labor Party tends to support unions as they help fund the party, while the Conservative Party favors the private financiers who fund them. The government may also favor some groups because (especially if internal) they may have information about the government that they would prefer to keep secret, so they continue to support these groups over others. Once again, this shows a weakness in pluralist democracy. Please note: this is just an example..