It should come as no surprise that the majority of people want democracy.
I keep hearing the the idea of promoting democracy throughout the world is a good thing.
But is it?
In California, the law was recently overturned, against the opinion of the majority… so the people voted to overturn the law.. and then the law overturned the vote of the people again.. In New Jersey, the Republican governor is saying he may overturn a law and put the decision to the people, because he feels the law has been misinterpreted.
Now, some may think this conversation is about Gay marriage. It isn’t. Its about the rule of law vs. the rule of the majority.. democracy.
When a law is popular, there is little rebellion. That is because the majority of people agree with it. When a law goes against what the majority believe, however, rebellion comes. There is unrest. The rule of law is viewed as tyranny.
That’s because the majority will always vote for democracy.
Think about it, in the United States, its probably safe to say that Christians, Whites and heterosexuals want democracy.. for now, at least.
But, its also safe to say this:
The poor don’t want a democracy.
African Americans don’t want a democracy.
Jews don’t want a democracy.
Homosexuals don’t want a democracy.
The homeless don’t want a democracy.
Orphans don’t want a democracy.
The unborn don’t want a democracy.
The United States is not a Democracy. It is a Constitutionally-limited Republic. (They don’t teach that in our schools anymore.)
The constitution wasn’t written so that the majority will get what they want. The constitution was written to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
That’s why the majority will always vote for a democracy.
2 comments:
Excellent analysis of the distinctions, and an important reminder of the need to protect ourselves from ourselves in our willingness to be complicit in the tyranny of the majority.
Definition of DEMOCRACY from Merriam-Webster:
"1a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections"
I would argue, as I think you have, that the second definition is more significant than the first because it recognizes a "system" put in place to exercise power (a system that can build in protections for the minority) rather than simple majority rule.
Equating majority rule with justice and fairness is taught from a very early age, as is the idea that those on the losing end of a decision that runs counter to their interests should just "suck it up" until they can win a majority. Thoreau, in his essay, "On the Duty of Resistance to Civil Government," now known generally as "Civil Disobedience," goes into great detail about the dangers of majority rule, not just for the minority, but for justice.
My American Studies high school honors class read both this essay and Emerson's "Self Reliance" in their entirety and spent several weeks reading, analysing, and discussing the implications of these two fundamental American essays. About a day into the Thoreau piece, and just after we had begun his analysis of "majority rule," I would pause, look pensive, and then say, "I haven't given any extra credit in a long time, now, have I?" In actuality, I rarely gave extra credit except for significant extra work that was assigned and available for all (perhaps twice a semester).
They would look up eagerly and reply, "No."
"Alright then," I would say, "Let's take a little break and do this. Raise your hand if you think that I should award ten points for those wearing dark shoes." In a class of 60-70 students, twenty hands would shoot up, followed by another fifteen to twenty more slowly and tentatively." Then I said, "Raise your hand if you think that those wearing lighter shoes deserve the ten points." All of the rest of the hands would shoot up with the exception of two or three (This pattern of response was followed nearly exactly for over thirty years of teaching this 11th grade, Honors English/Social Studies Team class of the brightest and most hard working kids in our school).
(Follow up comment due to the length limitations—I don't want to leave you dangling in suspense...)
I would ask if anyone did not vote. The two or three hands would raise, usually very reluctantly. I would then point to one and say, "Uh-huh, and you didn't vote because you couldn't tell whether your shoes were considered lighter or darker, right?" It always got a big laugh, and the kid admitted that that was the reason.
I would then ask the other two why they didn't vote, and invariably I would have one kid or occasionally two who said, "It isn't fair or it's not right."
"What do you mean?" I would ask in feigned confusion. The kid would go on to explain that the color of your shoes was no reason to be given extra credit and/or it was not fair to those who had other color shoes to lose out on the opportunity for extra credit. (Once in a very great while, I had a kid who said, "We were just talking about majority rule and justice, and I saw what you were doing." This was maybe five kids in thirty-two years.)
I would finally turn to the class and say, "So why did you vote the way you voted? Do you, in fact, think that you should be rewarded for the random color of the wardrobe that you chose today? Did you stop to think if it was fair? Did you think about the impact on those who had a different color shoe than you had? No, you voted the way you did because you personally benefitted from the result. Period." They would all nod in assent, jovially, though somewhat sheepishly, I am pleased to note.
"Okay," I would say, and end the little intervening lesson with, "Ten points for the person who considered justice and integrity before self"—This was always answered with a good-natured groan from most—"Now let's see what Thoreau really has to say about honor, justice, voting and majority rule, and the inevitable evolution of government." Their discussion and analysis were very generally much more animated and thoughtful after this brief illustration.
Great post, Tim.
"The Greatest Threat to Democracy is Hypocrisy! Seek Truth! Speak Truth!" Tim McMullen
Post a Comment