Final answer:
The statement that Weber thought democracies respond to all citizens through interest groups is false.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that Weber thought democracies are responsive to the interests of all citizens because all citizens belong to some interest group and politicians need to be responsive to interest groups to be re-elected is false. In political theory and practice, it has been observed that certain groups, particularly well-organized or wealthier interest groups, tend to have a stronger influence on policy-making than others. This is partly because some groups have more resources to mobilize support and gain access to policymakers. As a result, governments may sometimes prioritize the interests of these more influential groups over those of less organized or less affluent ones.
The pluralist theory of democracy suggests that competition among diverse interests is beneficial and strengthens democracy because it allows for an array of voices to be heard. However, the elite theory of democracy posits that actual political power is held by a small number of wealthy and influential individuals, meaning that the government does not always act in the interest of all citizens.
Interest group activity is indeed a double-edged sword. It can lead to a minority having their voices heard more than the majority, as stated in option 'c' related to interest groups, indicating that while pluralistic competition can be beneficial, it can also result in an imbalance in representation and government responsiveness.