In a democracy, when and where should majorities rule? And when should their powers be limited? Steve Levitsky and I propose a framework to think through these questions in a new piece in the January 2025 issue of 'Journal of Democracy'
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/947880
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/947880
Comments
Theil same
It’s all well and good until you ask “what if there was a truly heinous super-majority?” Because that happens too often these days. 😟
Democracies across the board are skewing towards authoritarianism, and through democratic processes.
Truly not a time to count on people to do the right thing.
Your previous Q is when new countries are formed, through violence, civil war, etc.
Trump seems to have won fairly, but he has flouted his oath and caused an insurrection. It isn’t easy to swim upstream after an election confirming him.
But save it in case this version of democracy survives to see the light again
The Supreme Court believes they are smart enough to dictate science of just about any kind to over 300 million people.
It doesn't make sense.
1 - The 'majority' comes into power by and through a true and bona fide Athenian level election, i.e., a 'win' by plurality vote isn't a true, bona fide Athenian level election, and doesn't produce a 'majority', and;
2 - Minority rights are unassailable.
Have you ever done any work on this style of direct democracy?
for the next time I teach my politics of public policy class
But I own my own house, and that’s not subject to a democratic vote.
Things like 'majority' & 'consensus' require either face-to-face physical presence (see the downfall of Rome) or must have a communication system in place as critical utility infrastructure.