Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
I found this piece by Vladislav Inozemtsev in the American Interest disturbingly interesting. I say "disturbing" because the argument is compelling, but it in no way leads me anywhere I want to go, or even really to think.
... Democratic government presumes to do more than it did at the time of its birth and maturation, so that citizens have far more to understand and judge about government than ever. The burden is often overwhelming even for the fairly well educated.
The implication is that even universal secondary education can no longer reliably produce a responsible citizen. Liberal democracy born in the Republic of Letters has to survive in the Empire of Television, where information flows in one direction and need not involve direct response. The civic dialogue that was once the very foundation of democratic decision-making has become a one-way process of convincing voters. The political dialogue of liberal democracies is not just degraded, as is widely acknowledged; it is qualitatively different.
Moreover, as the capacity of citizens to grasp policy issues has eroded from one side, the percentage of citizens expected to grasp them has risen from the other. In Western countries today there is far more inequality within electorates than ever, simply because, as was not the case during the 19th century, everyone above age 18 can vote. At the same time, the cult of money that is so widespread in contemporary consumer society tends to narrow the spectrum of voter interest even as the real spectrum of public policy challenges widens. This produces voters ready to support anyone who promises more prosperity, and voters who, when they get the chance (as in California’s referendum democracy) will vote for getting more while paying less. Impossible? Of course. And they do it anyway? Of course.
Democracy was the optimal form of government when voters were capable of making rational choices through an understanding of what was at stake, when they were ready to bear the responsibility for the consequences of their choices, and when the right to vote was understood to be a privilege, or the result of a struggle still remembered. Nowadays it is difficult to shake the impression that democratic societies are rapidly turning into ochlocracies, where the vast majority of citizens, seeing their rights as given and their responsibilities not at all, are easily addled by propaganda, distracted by spectacle and either unable or unwilling to invest the time and energy required to be a responsible democratic actor.
He argues for paring back the franchise. Those of us unwilling to arrive at that conclusion will have to find some flaw in his premises or his argument; I can't say I spot one immediately.
Have at it, Ricochet. If you can't, I suppose I'll still favor democracy--worst form of government except all the others that have been tried and all that--but I must say I'm growing increasingly depressed about it.
- Comment (54)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments:
May '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
Well said, KC. The heart of democracy is respect for the free will of individuals, regardless of their wisdom or lack thereof. Fools should be free, too.
The wise and productive will always be burdened by the foolish and the irresponsible. Local, limited government limits that burden. But the unity of a nation, like the unity of a family, always requires some tolerance of willfulness, weakness and stupidity.
The West's strong preference for democracy is derived from the Judeo-Christian worldview that asserts free will as the very essence of life. We all exist to choose, so the freedom to choose is more valuable than security.
Mar '11
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
Blake: Claire,
Federalism fixes everything.
The weakness of democracy isn't inherent in the enterprise -- it's entirely due to the scale on which it is being implemented. Surely the author isn't arguing that local school boards have stopped working? Just centralized, big-state democracies, right? Well there you go.
As any government becomes more remote, the citizenry has less stake in the outcome of issues. 24-hour news media certainly keeps voters plugged in to national issues, but it doesn't necessarily make them feel any more empowered. Why should I lose sleep over rules passed by federal agencies? It's not like there's anything I can do about them.
In other words, the less people feel that democracy matters, the less likely it is to "work". · 1 hour ago
I think you're on to something, Blake. We are all ill-equipped to make a coherent choice for a nation of 300 million but we do ok weighing in on issues that affect 30,000.
So a devolution is in order... Whip it into shape. Whip it good.
Jan '12
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
We can thank Thomas Jefferson for .... Jefferson had an extreme dislike for cities. He told James Madison: "I think our governments will remain virtuous for many centuries as long as they are chiefly agricultural; and this will be as long as there shall be vacant lands in any part of America. When they get plied upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, they will become corrupt as in Europe."
Sep '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
I see a consensus forming for limiting the franchise somehow to those with "shin in the game." (I love that typo- it also applies to those who still "walk the earth.")
Here's my suggestion: you have to vote in EVERY election, or your voter registration gets put in a dormant file until you pass a citizenship test. So at age 18, all interested applicants take a citizenship test (just use the current one in use by INS) and in turn they receive an active voter registration card. Thereafter, it only requires active participation to maintain an active voter registration.
That's a low bar, but at least it puts some level of interest, effort and knowledge on the table for people who want to vote. And none of this nonsense where people only vote in national elections.
Aug '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
Joseph Stanko
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Pilli
I would not mind seeing ownership of real property as a requirement for the privilege to vote.
If real property means real estate, I can't agree. There are many people with high stakes in this country's future prosperity who choose to rent rather than own -- especially these days!
This might actually have the opposite effect you'd expect.
Well, it's not the opposite effect of what I'd expect. In fact, you articulated much better than I could another facet of my misgivings about giving more voting power to the very propertied.
Joseph Stanko
My point: if you restricted the franchise to real estate owners or higher income brackets, the evidence suggests we'd get moreliberalism and a largerwelfare state.
Yes. I was trying to articulate this possibility myself.
I wouldn't phrase it as the evidence suggests this must happen (what if the bar were set just high enough to weed out the most dependent wards of the state?), but there's good evidence to suggest it may happen.
The dependent poor and the very rich both have much to gain from Statism.
Jun '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
KC Mulville:
The unalienable rights that God gave you were gifts. You didn't earn them.
Democracy isn't a political system that we chose because the citizenry is really noble and intelligent, and would likely produce smarter results.
Great points KC!
Along the same lines, as the Declaration says the just powers of government derive from the consent of the governed.
Nov '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
Terry Mott: I'm reminded of a conversation I had back in the '90s with an elderly relative of my wife. She was an independent, hard-working lady who worked a full-time job into her late-70s (she lived to be 93). She was politically engaged, kept herself informed of current events, and voted consistently.
Out of the blue one day, she asked me, "You know what the biggest problem with our country is?"
"What?"
"Women have the right to vote. I hate to be hard on my own sex, but we're too emotional to make intelligent decisions."
She then went on claim that Clinton would never have been elected President without a large number of women being politically "seduced" by him. . . .
I'm not saying she was right, but it sure gave me something to think about.
I am horrified to say that after spending time with my fellow alumnae of a well-known women's college, I have been tempted to think the same thing. I console myself by thinking that I'd probably have a similar reaction to a group of male alumni from most "elite" northeastern schools.
Edited on March 28, 2012 at 8:31pmNov '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
Fake John Galt
Click on the ad. It costs her money. Plus you have the satisfaction of knowing that when the MSM reports on her successful internet campaign that it is just you and a few other malcontents messing with her. Besides I am sure Ricochet gets a piece of the action so in a way you are supporting your own favorite addiction. · 3 hours ago
I didn't know this. Can someone confirm? I'll click on it again and again.
Nov '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
I'm a little confused as to why we keep talking about how democracy is working in the US. Raycon is right; we are supposed to have not a democracy but a republic. That bears repeating.
Aug '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
Lucy Pevensie
I'm a little confused as to why we keep talking about how democracy is working in the US. Raycon is right; we are supposed to have not a democracy but a republic. That bears repeating. · 6 minutes ago
Lucy, the article adopts a simplified definition of Democracy then uses oversimplification of history to justify eroding the consent of the governed from the process of government. Claire wants us to solve her moral dilemma.
On his premises: Democracies do more now and the stuff they do is hard to understand so only those who understand it should manage it.
This is a span of control problem. More technical requirements will need people with higher technical skill to manage them. (For example, when flying vs bus driving, don't hire bus drivers to be pilots.) The solutions to span of control problems are either simplify the tasks or only employ those with the skills to handle it.
If your policy prescription for Democracy doing more is to make it less accountable to the governed then you are solving the wrong problem.
Restrict the scope of government to solve the span of control problem.
Jun '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
I'll say it, and I'll even make it fancy:
ROLL BACK THE FRANCHISE.
Repeal the 17th Amendment, expand the electoral college, and pass legislation limiting the privilege of voting to those who actually pay more in taxes than they take in benefits.
Oct '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
I think some basic electoral reform, like independent redistricting commissions and open primaries, can do the trick, and extending House terms from two years to four years would do a lot, too.
Oct '10
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
There's also what the Europeans do, where political parties monopolize policy and political power; while people may vote for one party or another, they can't organize to change a party in quite the same way Americans can. The political elite ends up with much greater control over their national discourse.
Sep '11
Re: Is Democracy a Good Idea, After All?
I think the writer of this piece is a snob. Where is the evidence (for he adduces none) that there is a positive correlation between level of education and sensible voting decisions? And anyway, who decides what's sensible? One might equally argue that our rulers are in general over-educated and lacking in common sense. As for the internet and mass media: they change the way the game is played, the most important aspect being that information that was once the preserve of the highly literate is now widely and openly available. That's a good thing. I can't speak for the US, but in general I think (and of course this is only my view) that the UK electorate has shown itself to be pretty sensible in recent years, in two ways: voting out incompetent governments, and resisting the blandishments of political extremists - which is why we are all, across party lines, so upset by George Galloway's bye-election win in Bradford West.