structure for 'Political Theory'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 5. Democracy / b. Consultation

[government's consultation, by plebiscite or election]

23 ideas
The first priority in elections is to vote for people who support democracy [Anon (Diss)]
     Full Idea: A lottery is not democratic, because every state contains people who are not democratic, and if the lottery chooses them they will destroy the democracy. People should elect those who are observed to favour democracy.
     From: Anon (Diss) (Dissoi Logoi - on Double Arguments [c.401 BCE], §7)
The fundamental laws of a democracy decide who can vote [Montesquieu]
     Full Idea: The laws fundamental to a democracy are those that establish who is eligible to vote. (p.118 No less fundamental is the method of voting itself).
     From: Baron de Montesquieu (The Spirit of the Laws (rev. 1757) [1748], 02.02)
     A reaction: Tricky groups now are teenagers, convicted criminals, people with damaged brains, and citizens who live abroad. Maybe people who evade paying tax should lose the right to vote.
It is basic to a democracy that the people themselves must name their ministers [Montesquieu]
     Full Idea: A democratic people may be said to have ministers only when these have been named by the people itself. Thus it is a maxim fundamental to this type of government that the people must name its ministers.
     From: Baron de Montesquieu (The Spirit of the Laws (rev. 1757) [1748], 02.02)
     A reaction: In the UK we don't do this. We elect local representatives, usually of a preferred party, and then they chose the ministers, and even the leader. The people who run our country are a long way from direct democracy.
Voting should be public, so the lower classes can be influenced by the example of notable people [Montesquieu]
     Full Idea: When the people votes it should do so in public. ...For it is necessary that the lower classes be enlightened by those of higher rank, that the precipitous qualities of the lower classes be held in check by the grave example of certain notables.
     From: Baron de Montesquieu (The Spirit of the Laws (rev. 1757) [1748], 02.02)
     A reaction: This sounds shocking to us, but the lower classes were largely illiterate. Nowadays we have television to tell us how the notables are going to vote, and the less notables seem to be increasingly unimpressed.
All citizens (apart from the very humble poor) should choose their representatives [Montesquieu]
     Full Idea: All citizens ought to have the right to choose their representatives by election. The only exception concerns those whose condition is so base that they are considered to have no will of their own.
     From: Baron de Montesquieu (The Spirit of the Laws (rev. 1757) [1748], 11.06)
     A reaction: This is an amazingly liberal view of the franchise for its time (though he may not be including women), but with a rather breathtaking coda! It may be hard for us now to grasp the very humble state of an illiterate peasant.
Plebiscites are bad, because they exclude the leaders from crucial decisions [Rousseau]
     Full Idea: I would not approve of plebiscites like those of the Romans where the state's leaders and those most interested in its preservation were excluded from the deliberations on which its safety often depended.
     From: Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Discourse on the Origin of Inequality [1754], Intro letter)
     A reaction: I wish David Cameron had read this before 2016. This is exactly what happened with the Brexit referendum, where the people voted for an action entirely opposed to the preference of the majority of their elected representatives. Chaos ensued.
Silence of the people implies their consent [Rousseau]
     Full Idea: The silence of the people permits the assumption that the people consents.
     From: Jean-Jacques Rousseau (The Social Contract (tr Cress) [1762], II.01)
     A reaction: This seems to me a crucial principle for a democracy, because it says that the democratic way of life is much more than elections. Each citizen has a duty to bravely speak out; the more citizens willing to do this, the less bravery is required.
Democratic elections are dangerous intervals in government [Rousseau]
     Full Idea: Elections leave dangerous intervals and are stormy.
     From: Jean-Jacques Rousseau (The Social Contract (tr Cress) [1762], III.06)
     A reaction: American presidential elections partially paralyse government for about nine months. In a settled democracy the process of election seems OK. The immediate aftermath can be worse. Losers may refuse to accept the result.
Majority rule means obligations can be imposed on me [Hegel]
     Full Idea: Majority decisions are at variance with the principle that I should be personally present in anything which imposes an obligation on me.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Elements of the Philosophy of Right [1821], 309 add)
     A reaction: The big democratic problem of my time is sharp binary decisions made by a democracy, such as UK leaving the EU, or Scotland leaving the UK. A very large minority in such cases has their will entirely thwarted, whichever way it goes.
The state should reflect all interests, and not just popular will, or a popular party [Hegel, by Houlgate]
     Full Idea: The best guarantee of freedom is for the state to be organised in such a way that the legislature reflects all the substantial interests within civil society, and not just the 'will of the majority', or the parties which happen to find popular support.
     From: report of Georg W.F.Hegel (Elements of the Philosophy of Right [1821], 311) by Stephen Houlgate - An Introduction to Hegel 08 'Freedom'
     A reaction: In our first-past-the-post system innumerable interests fail to be represented, and parliament is crushed by dull plodders with ossified views who smugly hang on to safe seats. IMHO.
How people vote should be on public record, so they can be held accountable [Mill, by Wolff,J]
     Full Idea: Mill believed in an open vote. People should be held accountable for how they vote, and therefore it should be a matter of public record.
     From: report of John Stuart Mill (Representative Government [1861]) by Jonathan Wolff - An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev) 3 'Representative'
     A reaction: Nowadays it is a mantra that voting should be secret, because coercion is an obvious problem, but MPs vote publicly, and are held accountable for their voting records. People like the mafia seem to make open public voting impossible.
Voting is a strict duty, like jury service, and must only be aimed at the public good [Mill]
     Full Idea: The citizen's vote is not a thing in which he has an option; it has no more to do with his personal wishes than the verdict of a juryman. ...he is bound to give it according to his best and most conscientious opinion of the public good.
     From: John Stuart Mill (Representative Government [1861], p.299), quoted by Jonathan Wolff - An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev) 3 'Representative'
     A reaction: Mill was also concerned that voters might pursue 'class interest' (which they currently do, big time).
An election, and its lead up time, are always a national crisis [Tocqueville]
     Full Idea: The period which immediately precedes an election, and that during which the election is taking place, must always be considered as a national crisis.
     From: Alexis de Tocqueville (Democracy in America (abr Renshaw) [1840], 1.07)
     A reaction: Rousseau said something similar. Election day in modern Britain is very peaceful and civilised, but it used to be chaotic. The weeks preceding it are invariably nasty.
If we want the good life for the greatest number, we must let them decide on the good life [Nietzsche]
     Full Idea: If the business of politics is to make life tolerable for the greatest number, this greatest number may also determine what they understand by a tolerable life.
     From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Human, All Too Human [1878], 438)
We should decide whether voting is for self-interests, or for the common good [Wolff,J]
     Full Idea: To avoid mixed-motivation voting, we must choose between one model of people voting in accordance with their preferences, and another of voting for their estimate of the common good.
     From: Jonathan Wolff (An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev) [2006], 3 'Voting')
     A reaction: Personally I always voted for the common good, and only slowly realised that most people were voting for their own interests. A rational society would at least bring this dichotomy into the open. Voting for self-interest isn't wicked.
Condorcet proved that sensible voting leads to an emphatically right answer [Wolff,J]
     Full Idea: Condorcet proved that provided people have a better than even chance of getting the right answer, and that they vote for their idea of the common good, then majority decisions are an excellent way to get the right result.
     From: Jonathan Wolff (An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev) [2006], 3 'Voting')
     A reaction: [compressed] The point is that collective voting magnifies the result. If they tend to be right, the collective view is super-right. But if they tend towards the wrong, the collective view goes very wrong indeed. History is full of the latter.
Democracy needs more than some institutions; diverse sections of the people must be heard [Sen]
     Full Idea: Democracy has to be judged not just by the institutions that formally exist but by the extent to which different voices from diverse sections of the people can actually be heard.
     From: Amartya Sen (The Idea of Justice [2009], Pref 'Public')
     A reaction: Depends what you mean by 'democracy'. Should the workplace and the school and the family be democratic, or just the choice of leaders? What can oblige leaders to listen to the people? Listen to, and then ignore?
Democracy as 'government by discussion' now has wide support [Sen]
     Full Idea: In contemporary political philosophy the view that democracy is best seen as 'government by discussion' has gained widespread support.
     From: Amartya Sen (The Idea of Justice [2009], 15 'Content')
     A reaction: The obvious worry about this is inefficiency in decision-making. Also the dominance of noisy stupidity. But citizens need to feel involved, and committed to the decisions.
A referendum result arises largely from ignorance [Reybrouck]
     Full Idea: In a referendum you ask everyone to vote on a subject that usually only a few know anything about.
     From: David van Reybrouck (Against Elections [2013], 4 'remedies')
     A reaction: Tell me about it! I was forced to vote in the 2016 Brexit referendum, and felt thoroughly out of my depth on such a complex economic question.
If several losing groups would win if they combine, a runoff seems called for [Tuckness/Wolf]
     Full Idea: It is possible that the people who supported several losing candidates might have joined forces and had a majority. For that reason, many countries have a runoff election.
     From: Tuckness,A/Wolf,C (This is Political Philosophy [2017], 5 'Does democracy')
     A reaction: The problem is that there is no rationale as to who stands in an election. If their views are evenly spread, the first result seems OK. If there are five left-wingers and one right-winger, a runoff seems to be produce a more just result.
Rights as interests (unlike rights as autonomy) supports mandatory voting [Tuckness/Wolf]
     Full Idea: If rights concern people's interests, that might support mandatory voting, but if rights rely on protecting autonomy that might oppose it.
     From: Tuckness,A/Wolf,C (This is Political Philosophy [2017], 5 'Interest')
     A reaction: I approach it from the other end, and am inclined to support mandatory voting, which suggests I am more concerned about interests than about autonomy.
How should democratic votes be aggregated? Can some person's votes count for more? [Tuckness/Wolf]
     Full Idea: A major question for democracy is how are the contributions of different people aggregated into a collective decision? Must votes have equal weight and consideration, or is it permissible for different people's votes to count differently?
     From: Tuckness,A/Wolf,C (This is Political Philosophy [2017], 5 'What is')
     A reaction: Mill hoped that wise and knowledgeable people would have a strong influence over the others, but we have recently moved into the post-truth era, where we are swamped by bogus facts. Does that strengthen the case for elite voting?
Discussion before voting should be an essential part of democracy [Tuckness/Wolf]
     Full Idea: According to advocates of deliberative democracy, people should have an opportunity to talk and reason with one another before votes are cast.
     From: Tuckness,A/Wolf,C (This is Political Philosophy [2017], 5 'Who gets')
     A reaction: This is now done on Facebook and Twitter, but no one thinks that is sufficient. We will never again persuade most people to actually meet up and discuss issues.