Democracy Flashcards

1
Q

What does democracy mean?

A

‘Rule by the people’
(Demos + kratos)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is a theocracy?

A

A religious or monarchic dictatorship.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is an oligarchy?

A

A state ruled by a small set of elites.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is an epistocracy?

A

A state ruled by experts, or the wisest person/group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is a strength of epistocracies?

A

We normally consult experts on complex political decisions, rather than ordinary citizens.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is a weakness of epistocracies?

A

Educated experts have biases that go against the ordinary person’s interests.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Describe Wollheim’s Paradox of Democracy

A

Say you’re a democrat. You’re voting on some policy, and you have to choose between options A and B. You choose A, and endorse its implementation, so vote A. However, the outcome of the vote is B. (The majority of votes were for B). Because you are a democrat, it seems that if you uphold the notion of democracy you are committed to the belief that A should be the case (you endorsed it) but also that B should be the case (because that’s the majority vote). But they can’t both be the case.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is Walzer’s response to Wollheim’s supposed paradox?

A

Walzer says that there’s no paradox, there’s no incoherence. He argues that Wollheim takes the notion of ‘right’ in an unusual way. The central notion of democracy is that the people get to rule, not because of what they know, or whether they’re wise or objectively correct, but rather because of who they are. The people who have to live under the rules are those who get to make the rules. And if the law if going to bind them as free people, then it has to be their law. They get to make decisions not because they’re right but rather because it’s their decision to make. We are committed to the democratic vote in the end, because the people get to make their decision.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What are instrumental arguments about democracy?

A

They are arguments that investigate democracy as a means to another end, e.g. ‘we want democracy in so far as it helps us get something else that’s valuable.’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What does Rousseau say about democracy?

A

You can be free, and you can be governed, but only if you’re governed by laws you make yourself.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is a strength of the democratic political state?

A

The political state involves the civil service, military, police etc. and keeps going regardless of what government changes occur. The state remains in place. If we just had a system of monarchy, then as the change of rule occurs, the state itself would be unstable. So having a democracy in place helps offer stability.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What does Sen say about democracy?

A

He notes that you don’t get famines in democracies. People think that famines are to do with crop yields and whether - things beyond our control. But they’re actually about whether outside people ignore it. Within a democracy, the government wants to be re-elected - they only keep their place that way - so the people’s interests are at the forefront. To get support, you have to be accountable for what goes on through things like free press who report on famines etc. It reports these things, so we know about it; there’s a certain demand for transparency. This keeps the government from ignoring what’s going on in other places.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Expound Condorcet’s Jury Theorem

A

1) Democracy has an epistemic value since these procedurse produce good outcomes.
2) If the average voter has a greater likelihood of being right rather than wrong (e.g. a better than 0.5 chance of being right), then the majority is more likely to be right than the minority.
3) The larger the voting cohort, the greater the likelihood that the majority will be right.
4) In very large cohorts, the majority’s being right becomes extremely likely.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is the problem with Condorcet’s Jury Theorem?

A

The majority may be biased, e.g. racist and thus believe themselves to be right.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What does Mill say about democracy?

A

He sees it as good for us; it exposes us to other people’s arguments and opinions and forces us to discuss with people who aren’t like us. It forces us to compromise. For Mill, we need democracy not just for its results, but also for producing better citizens.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is the problem with Mill’s view of democracy?

A

Sharing our ideas with others who disagree may just incite violence and encourage people to learn how to disagree more vociferously.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is democracy?

A

A system of politics in which ultimate power lies with each and every individual citizen equally, whereby political institutions and the people who work in them are accountable to the people.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What is wrong with democracy according to Plato and Aristotle?

A

It is based on the false notion that people are equally fit to rule.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What is the tyranny of the majority?

A

The problem that, in a democracy, only the majority counts, and the majority can act unjustly such that minority groups can’t influence policy and the minority lacks freedom.

20
Q

What is Rousseau’s argument in defence of democracy?

A

Self-rule is the only way in which we can both be governed and free in some sense. Democratic forms of government enable us to hold the government to account which is a way of protecting our freedoms.

21
Q

What is a non-instrumental argument from political equality?

A

One person, one vote: if you see democracy as embodying political equality, then we must think about how the people should rule, and one person one vote ensures no-one’s voice is weighted more than any other.

22
Q

What may be a problem with one person, one vote?

A

One may wish for the best and wisest to rise to the top, such that they are given more votes to minimise the role of the uneducated. Or it could be argued that diverse voices should have weighted votes if a policy particularly affects them. What this shows, though, is that just because you’re a proponent of democracy, doesn’t mean you necessarily care about political equality.

23
Q

Why might one person one vote discourage voting?

A

I might think my vote doesn’t really count because I know I live in a constituency where 75% of the vote is not in my favour, so my vote doesn’t make any affect. If we are in a position where those in government can redraw the boundaries of constituencies, then there’s the potential for political inequality.

24
Q

Why might voting be anti-democratic?

A

Because voting involves selecting the best, or picking out the favourite etc. What’s really democratic, it could be argued, and that really embodies the notion of political equality is something like a lottery, whereby any one of us could rule. And as long as the seat rotates, we won’t have disparities in political level. Everyone is one and the same.

25
Q

What is the defence of democracy from justice?

A

Elizabeth Anderson: ‘Each member of state is entitled to have equal standing to make claims on others regarding the protection of their interests, and to participate in decisions concerning the shared background conditions of their interactions and the adoption of collective goals. The democratic way of life realises the universal and equal standing of the members of society…’

26
Q

What is the defence of democracy from justice?

A

Elizabeth Anderson: ‘Each member of state is entitled to have equal standing to make claims on others regarding the protection of their interests, and to participate in decisions concerning the shared background conditions of their interactions and the adoption of collective goals. The democratic way of life realises the universal and equal standing of the members of society…’

27
Q

What does Elizabeth Anderson think?

A

That democracy is the right way to govern, but we need to have institutions in order to deliver on the good things. And the institutions themselves treat us in a particular way, embody a type of lifestyle, so those two arguments are bound up together and can’t be easily separated. It’s not about people having an equal say or vote, but about people having an equal standing first.

28
Q

What does Ben Saunders say about the relationship between democracy and majority rule?

A

‘democracy, political equality and majority rule are three distinct concepts and no one of these logically entails one of the other.’
- Democracy says that decisions made by a group must be appropriately responsive to the expressed wishes of the members of that group.
- Political equality says that each group member must have an equal influence over the group’s decision.
- Majority rule says that the option that gets the most votes should be the group decision.

29
Q

What is the problem of permanent minorities?

A

Permanent minorities are often presented as political minorities, as people with sets of views who have zero influence in majority rule. Small minorities of the population that are fixed almost always know that they’re never going to win on decisions where that minority status is salient.

30
Q

When does the problem of permanent minorities arise?

A

When there are ‘stable’ groups that are unequal in size.

31
Q

What is Peter Jones’ suggestion about how to fix permanent minorities?

A

He suggests proportionality: when a 1/4 of the population are aesthetes, and 3/4 are economists, the aesthetes will never win and never have influence over the decision. So why not let the aesthetes get their way 1/4 of the time, in proportion to their numbers, and the economists get their way 3/4, in proportion to their numbers?

32
Q

What is Saunders’ suggestion to fix permanent minorities?

A

Weighted lottery voting: each person votes for their favoured option, but it’s not the option with the most votes that wins. Rather, a single vote is randomly selected and that one determines the outcome. However, if there are groups of unequal sizes, we couldn’t toss a coin because you’d fail to individually consider the larger group. So there should be a lottery that offers proportional chances.

33
Q

What is (1) problem with lottery voting?

A

It can allow extreme or undesirable minorities to win, e.g. radicals. There’s a reason why those are minorities, and it’s good that under majority rule those are kept from having undue influence.

34
Q

What is a solution to the problem of radicals?

A

Set up the lottery system such that there’s a minimum ceiling that you have to reach, in order to be admissible.

35
Q

What is (2) problem for lottery voting?

A

It fails to live up to its promise of equality, because outcomes may still be unequal.

36
Q

What is the reply to (2) problem with lottery voting?

A

The model isn’t outcome specific; it’s about having an equal chance going into it. The point is that it could be your vote.

37
Q

What is (3) problem with lottery voting?

A

It neglects the importance of deliberation. Why would people try to engage in deliberation, or try to persuade others and get people to agree with them if the chance of their vote going through was the same as everyone else’s?

38
Q

What is the solution to (3) problem?

A

The more people you can convince, the more likely a vote holding your opinion will be picked.

39
Q

What is (4) problem with lottery voting?

A

It may result in inconsistent sets of decisions. Say one vote for P during a round, then a vote for not-P during another.

40
Q

What is (1) challenge for democracy?

A

Diversity: the people is made up of various individuals who have different sorts of views / backgrounds / aspirations / education etc. Diversity will affect what the common good will be for all people. How do we bring that diverse, disparate range of individuals together such that they might form a collective decision.

41
Q

What is (2) challenge for democracy?

A

Disagreement: there are moral cleavages that exist in our society. People disagree about fundamental moral and political questions. We even disagree about how to decide on such things. If democracy is the people’s rule, in what sense can we have the people’s rule when people are deeply divided about fundamental issues?

42
Q

What is (3) challenge for democracy?

A

Division: we might be firmly divided into different groups in terms of our beliefs. And it might be extremely difficult to have any kind of connection or conversation across these divides. We may not just see people as disagreeing with us, but start to see them as adversaries, and feel hostile towards them. We’d see them as people to be defeated.

43
Q

What is (4) challenge for democracy?

A

Disaffection: where there are obvious problems, division and diversity, people might start to feel ‘why bother’? If they think the system doesn’t work for them, they may not spend time getting information/voting/participating. This is more so if they feel no solidarity with the people.

44
Q

Expound Kenneth Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem

A

There’s a paradox at the heart of supposed collective democratic decision-making.
- Lily: Apples > Bananas > Chocolate
- Jacob: Banana > Chocolate > Apple
- Hasan: Chocolate > Apples > Bananas
The problem: we’re usually picking between more than just a single decision between two people. There’s no obvious majority when we’re trying to aggregate preferences over a range of things. So we end up with this impossibility when it comes to rationally trying to aggregate preferences.

45
Q

What is the problem with public voting?

A

There’s a social pressure to voting. Unless we had complete equality and independence within society, people can be pressured to vote a certain way, or be bought behind the scenes. In particular, if there’s an embargo on reporting before the end of the voting period - before everyone’s had the opportunity to vote - you end up discouraging people from voting because you can see what the likely outcome will be.

46
Q

What is the problem with private voting?

A

It’s not good for the public will; people wouldn’t necessarily vote for the common good. They could say one thing in public and another thing in private. They may vote for their own interest rather than the common good.