A true democracy, one that combines majority rule with respect for minority rights, requires two sets of institutions. First, institutions of representation, such as political parties, parliaments, and electoral systems, are needed to elicit popular preferences and turn them into policy action. Second, democracy requires institutions of restraint, such as an independent judiciary and media, to uphold fundamental rights like freedom of speech and prevent governments from abusing their power. Representation without restraint – elections without the rule of law – is a recipe for the tyranny of the majority....
When democracy fails to deliver economically or politically, perhaps it is to be expected that some people will look for authoritarian solutions. And, for many economists, delegating economic policy to technocratic bodies in order to insulate them from the “folly of the masses” almost always is the preferred approach....
Optimists believe that new technologies and modes of governance will resolve all problems and send democracies centered on the nation-state the way of the horse-drawn carriage. Pessimists fear that today’s liberal democracies will be no match for the external challenges mounted by illiberal states like China and Russia, which are guided only by hardnosed realpolitik. Either way, if democracy is to have a future, it will need to be rethought.Project Syndicate
Rethinking Democracy
Dani Rodrik | Professor of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey
7 comments:
This is a pretty lame conception of democracy. We really should resist the idea that policy need only be just a translation of voter "preferences" into action rather than the outcome of a broad-based deliberative process. It gives us watered-down, thoughtless, ultimately stupid politcs.
Democracy is self-government. People aren't governing themselves if all they are doing is conveying their preferences to elected representatives.
Agree, Dan, but right now representatives are not close to carrying out constituent preferences according to both studies and polling. Lobbyists rule.
It not only lame but totally incorrect.
"It is accepted as democratic when public offices are allocated by lot; and as oligarchic when they are filled by election." (Aristotle, Politics 4.1294be).
The United States along with most of the modern world claims to democratic republican forms of national government.
I submit that a truly democratic republican form of government has never existed or even been suggested.
The closest thing that ever existed to a simple republican system was the Chinese Imperial Examination system which worked pretty well when it was followed.
A democratic republican system of government would be as follows;
A initial group of potential candidates is chosen based on a set of professional and academic qualifications say a graduate degree and 10 years of profession experience.
Citizens selected for the candidate position would then be asked to volunteer for a term of service of 10-20 years. If chosen the Candidates will understand that they and their spouse will not be allowed to own any private property for the rest of their lives. They will rent everything they will use and their children will only be allowed to own property after they are declared independent under law.
They will have to be supported entirely of with an income that is no more than 1000% of the national average income as a state stipend.
If they wish to live better then the officials must have a policy that raises national incomes across the board.
The out the volunteer group a final candidate is selected at random. At the end of the term the official will not be selected again and while in office he can recalled at anytime by a majority of vote of his district to be replaced by another sortition.
Districts are decided and allotted perfectly based on computer models without human input.
All officials at selected this way. 1 President. 10 Supreme Judges, and 1000 legislators.
A government like this would be a democratic republican government.
No nobody has ever has the balls to try something like this and I doubt they ever will.
"First, institutions of representation, such as political parties, parliaments, and electoral systems, are needed to elicit popular preferences and turn them into policy action"
We have these, they are operating fine... if you read the actual laws/resolutions that come out of this institutional process, they read fine with no problems... ie Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Humphrey-Hawkins full employment, Federal UE Insurance, Platinum Coin options, etc...
"Second, democracy requires institutions of restraint, such as an independent judiciary and media,"
AND we have these institutions also already in place and they are operating fine with no problems...
The institutions are there and operating this is undeniable...
The problem(s) is with the people who are currently staffing these institutions in that they are morons....
rsp,
The reference to Aristotle above should be Aristotle, Politics 4.1294b (8). The "8" refers to the line in the section.
Politics 4.1294b
See also "...it is a democracy when those who are free are in the majority and have sovereignty over the government, and an oligarchy when the rich and more well born [20] are few and sovereign."
Aristotle, Politics 4.1290b (19-20)
Post a Comment