Representative Democracy is not mob rule (or is it?)
While I agree that Democracy is the best form of government we have—I do not think that mob psychology is particularly controlling. Mob psychology tends toward the extremes, where as our democracy tends toward the center… . .
I suppose it might look like we’re near the center, just like it looks like the Earth is flat when you’re standing on it. But I suspect that the distance of time will provide a rounder perspective. When our nation permitted slavery, it seemed like a moderate thing, I suspect. When our nation denied women their rights, the Elizabeth Cady Stantons were the extremists. Now, you might argue that those weren’t actual democracies, because African-Americans and Women were denied the right to vote, but how do you account for things like segregation, and Japanese interment, and torture, and wiretapping, and (I suspect) the denial of gay marriage, and maybe, even, our treatment of animals, or the fact that we eat them. I don’t know how history will judge us harshly, but I’m almost certain that history will judge us harshly, as the majority at any given time has always been wrong about a major moral issue, even many moral issues.
Let me give you an example that seems more trivial. I’m a bit of a libertarian nut, so when I see things like the minimum wage law, for instance, I see an awful, terrible injustice that hurts the poorest, most vulnerable people. But the minimum wage is a very popular program, so I’m the extremist, even though I’m pretty sure that history will vindicate me, and that the minimum wage law will seem as primitive and foolish as medieval attempts at wizardry. Sometimes the nut is right. Think of the now-famous Peter Schiff video on YouTube, where his predictions of financial calamity were dismissed by more mainstream voices. Think of the global warming debate, which was famously declared closed by Al Gore because of consensus. I’m not sure debate should ever be closed, but I’m very sure that it should never be closed because of consensus. Consensus has a very poor track record. The consensus of thought in 5000 B.C. was pretty bad, and the consensus of thought in 500 A.D. wasn’t much better, and the consensus of thought in 1820 looks pretty deplorable, so why should be so optimistic about consensus today?
Again, I’m not saying that we should chuck Democracy because of its poor track record … I’m saying it’s the best form of Government we have, because everything else is so awful. But because consensus can be so unreliable, immoral, and even hateful, I’m a big proponent of giving consensus as little power as possible. Give it the bare minimum necessary to maintain order. There is a difference between consensus and consensus with Government force. Consensus gets you Britney Spears. Consensus with government force gets you Guantanamo Bay. Or to be more serious, consensus gets you discrimination—which is bad. Consensus with Government force gets you segregation and slavery—which is worse. Consensus gets you social shunning. Consensus with government power gets you jail.
Okay, maybe I’ve taken this argument farther than you’re willing to go. But you can at least agree that Democracy has done some terrible things, and that it’s quite likely that Democracy is still doing some terrible things, and that the harsh light of history will make our near-center politics look like a pretty awful extreme, right?
UPDATE: Here’s some more “consensus” to fear.
