Democracy

Question 1

Aggregative democracy

Answer 1

All citizens’ preferences have equal weight in open process of preference aggregation to determine a collective decision

Question 2

Elements of deliberative democracy

Answer 2

1. Decisions preceded by discussion which involves reason-giving between equals, given reasonable pluralism
2. Discussion oriented towards agreement and consensus (rationally motivated consensus)
3. Reason-giving requires appeal to considerations of common good
4. Citizens willing to transform their preferences in light of discussion and reason-giving

Question 3

Reasons to favour deliberative democracy

Answer 3

1. Non-alienation/liberty (if laws grounded in mutually acceptable and rational reason-giving, then not ‘alienated from laws’ even where disagree)
2. Mutual respect (through process of reason-giving as equals)
3. Good policy/epistemic benefits
4. Social choice (process transforms preferences, helping to avoid majority cycling or intransitive social preferences of simple majority voting)

Question 4

Criticism of deliberative democracy (Young 2000)

Answer 4

1. Privileges articulate and highly educated
2. Downgrades ‘non-rational’ forms of communication, possibly to exclusion of minorities
3. Focus on reaching consensus risks marginalising some points of view, with issues kept off agenda for sake of agreement

Question 5

Why does Mouffe (2005) reject deliberative democracy? Alternative

Answer 5

AGONISM

1. Ineradicable pluralism of value means we should be wary of conceptions of democracy aimed at consensus
2. Agonistic democracy

Question 6

Christiano’s (1996) equality-based argument to justify democracy

Answer 6

1. Equal consideration of interests – justice requires ‘individuals be treated equally w/regard to their interests’
2. Require collectively binding laws in society
3. Given we require such laws but disagree over what they should be, democracy satisfies equal consideration of interests and embodies equality

Question 7

Estlund’s justification for democracy

Answer 7

EPISTEMIC PROCEDURALISM

Democracy justified because it’s epistemically best (consequence-based) among systems generally acceptable in way required by political legitimacy (equality-based)

Question 8

Why doesn’t Estlund favour epistocracy?

Answer 8

LACKS LEGITIMACY

1. Expertness = matter of reasonable disagreement
2. Problem of invidious comparison arises when some people told they’re less wise/expert (when it’s a matter of reasonable disagreement)
3. Therefore epistocracy lacks legitimacy

Question 9

Estlund’s critique of equality-based arguments for democracy

Answer 9

COIN FLIPPING

Something more than equality must explain preference for democracy because equality in decision-making procedure fulfilled by coin-flipping to decide laws

Question 10

Problem with rule by small group of randomly chosen citizens?

Answer 10

1. Lack of formal input into laws

2. Lack of control/self-determination

Question 11

Condorcet Jury theorem

Answer 11

If probability of voters choosing correctly >50% and people choose independently, then probability of correct collective decision tends to 100%

Question 12

Problems with Condorcet Jury theorem as justification of democracy

Answer 12

1. Legitimate political disagreement concerns content of common good itself, not just best way to achieve it
2. Independent voting prevents deliberation + seems unlikely to be true
3. How likely to be >50%…? (Caplan: myth of the rational voter)

Question 13

How does Dworkin justify individual rights in democracy?

Answer 13

1. Individual rights (against democratic decision-making) derive from same value that justifies democracy itself
2. Value of treating citizens equally justifies restrictions on scope of majority-rule decision-making
3. E.g. Nazi’s can’t vote to disenfranchise Jews because, even if majority supports it, because this contradicts fundamental value of democracy (equality)

Question 14

Brennan’s argument for epistocracy?

Answer 14

UNRESTRICTED UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE UNJUST

1. Citizens have right that political power held over them should be exercised by competent people in competent way
2. Universal suffrage violates this right
3. Epistocracy fails requirement that political power be distributed in ways against which there are no qualified objections
4. But it’s less intrinsically unjust than democracy’s violation of above right and produces (probably) more just outcomes
5. Epistocracy more just than democracy, if not perfectly just

Question 15

Advantages of ‘lottocracy’ (rule by randomly selected group of citizens)?

Answer 15

1. Prevents corruption (don’t need to raise money for elections)
2. More descriptively representative (likely to have better minority representation, for example)
3. Focus on important problems (politicians focus on what’s popular, lottocracy could be non-electorally motivated citizens, informed by relevant experts)
4. Respects ideal of political equality (in lottocracy each has equal chance to wield influence, whereas with elections only a small elite will ever have the chance to do so)
5. Epistemic benefits (vs democracy with incentives for uninformed electorate)

Question 16

Autonomy

Answer 16

Autonomy = giving shape to one’s life through forming judgements and acting on them (sort of self-rule)

Question 17

Why does Christiano say there’s a moral obligation to comply with democratic political authority?

Answer 17

If fail to obey laws resulting from democratic process, then fail to act in way that gives equal concern and respect (which is a moral obligation)

Question 18

Popular sovereignty

Answer 18

Idea that authority of government created, sustained and subject to the will of the people

Question 19

Aristocracy

Answer 19

Few rulers, aim at common good

Question 20

Oligarchy

Answer 20

Few rulers, aim at their own good

Question 21

Adversary democracy

Answer 21

1. Based on conflicts of interest and gives citizens fair opportunities to advance their interests against others’
2. Contrast to ‘unitary’ democracy, aimed at consensus

Question 22

Sen’s argument to justify democracy

Answer 22

1. Elected governments have strong incentives to avert famines/other disasters
2. No famine ever in well-functioning democracy

Question 23

Problems with deliberative democracy

Answer 23

1. Deliberation may not improve outcomes (e.g. group think and herd mentality)
2. Consensus might be due to conformity, not reasoned agreement (and once consensus reached, may not revise/challenge it sufficiently over time)
3. Deliberation may be ideal, but don’t achieve ideal by mirroring its institutionalization (insisting on reasoned public debate today will just give more power to educated elites)
4. Ineradicable pluralism of value means we should be wary of conceptions of democracy aimed at consensus

Question 24

Popper - argument in favour of democracy

Answer 24

Democracy enables a “bloodless coup” (i.e. elections provide peaceful mechanism for removing those in power)

Question 25

Is unequal influence necessarily a problem in deliberative democracy?

Answer 25

ESTLUND:

1. If there are good reasons, consistent with equal respect, then unequal influence (e.g. from education) does not violate equality
2. More educated/those better at reasoning may help to better inform us
3. Reasons given must be grounded in common interest