It is an
accepted fact that liberal democracy is the worst possible political
system—except for all others (thank you, Sir Winston). This list doesn’t aim to
advocate tyranny, but to review the flaws and failures of the democratic
process.
We are not
perfect—and neither are our governments, since they are made by humans too. It
is most advisable to be skeptical, even of democracy itself. After all, even
Thomas Jefferson was wary of the “tyranny of the masses”.
10 Aphoristic Equality
One of the
foundations of democracy is the assumption that all votes are equal. Well,
that’s the theory—but in fact it is rarely so (more on that later). It assumes
that all opinions are worth the same, which is quite a big leap of faith, since
we are putting the same value on the opinions of the educated and the ignorant,
and the law-abiding citizens and crooks.
Even if you
think that all people are created equal, it is obvious that their environments
are very different—and as a result, so is their character. By assuming that all
opinions are equal you are also assuming that most people are able to reach a
rational, informed decision after seriously exploring all pros and cons.
9 Populism
A common
criticism of democracy is that in the end it devolves into a popularity
contest. Polls don’t decide who is right—that’s simply decided by whoever is
most willing to say what people like to hear. As a result, many candidates to
political office resort to populism, pursuing policies that focus on the
immediate satisfaction of whims instead of long-term improvements.
Populist
leaders focus on emotion before reason and “common sense” over more academic
wisdom, which often produces bad ideas that will be defended with the
stubbornness of a mule, regardless of whether they are good or bad.
8 Tribal Mentality
Let’s be honest here: mankind has not evolved much
since the Stone Age. Yes, we have tamed the forces of nature and discovered a
lot of things—and this Internet business is amazing. But human nature remains
the same, more or less. We still think in tribal terms, “my people vs. your
people”. Call it class struggle, xenophobia, nationalism, or whatever you
like—the thing is that most of us identify with one group or another, and
almost every meaningful group has alliances or enmities with other groups. This
is part of human nature, and can work peacefully . . . or not.
In a
democracy, tribal mentality is very dangerous, because it will make you vote
“for your team” instead of voting according to issues. That means that whoever
leads “your team” can rest assured that they have your vote, and instead of
focusing on your interests, they can proceed to deal with their own. Unfair
legislation can be passed if there are vocal groups in the majority (by
oppressing the minority) or in the minorities (by entitling them to privileges
that the majority can’t enjoy).
7 Corruption
This is not
a specific flaw of democracy, and in fact it can be argued that democracy tends
to be less prone to corruption than other systems, since it leaves open the
possibility of ejecting someone from office. But that possibility also favors a
very specific kind of corruption: machine politics, a political organization in
which the bosses dole out rewards in exchange for the vote.
It can be as
simple as paying money to someone in exchange for their vote, or giving someone
a job in the office of the politician who commands the machine. A softer form
of machine politics (or “clientelism”) involves the earmarking of federal funds
for certain districts or states, so that Representatives and Senators vote for
the programs those funds are allocated to.
6 Entitlements
Another side-effect of democracy is that if the State
starts providing a service or a pay to someone, they begin to feel entitled to
it. So if someone tries to stop providing it—well, they just made a large
number of deadly foes. When Margaret Thatcher cut coal subsidies, for example,
coal miners felt that their jobs had been threatened and became bitter enemies
of Thatcher and her ilk. Most people will never vote for the party of someone
who “took their jobs”, no matter how long ago this might have happened.
5 Mob Rule
An
unrestricted democracy means that the majority decides over the minority. This
leaves the minority relatively powerless—and the smaller it is, the less power
it wields. Which means that the smallest minority of all—the individual—is
effectively depending on his agreement with the majority.
To account
for this problem, mature democracies have developed a set of checks and
balances in an attempt to make sure that it doesn’t happen; chief among these
is the separation of the powers of the State. But this actually makes a system
less democratic, since it interferes with the principle of “people’s power.”
4 Complex Accountability
When a
dictatorship falls, it is fairly easy to hold someone accountable for any
crimes committed by the State. It is certainly easier than in a democracy,
since in that case, officials have been elected by the people. If those
officials have committed a crime in opposition to their official platform and
without the knowledge of the public, it is simply their own fault and the
people who voted for them are innocent. But if a candidate advocates curtailing
human rights for a minority, and upon finding himself elected to office,
carries out his plan . . . are not the voters also responsible in some degree?
3 State Secrets
All states
have dirty skeletons in the cupboard. In a dictatorship they are just
discreetly hidden, sometimes in plain sight. In a democracy, which tends to
rely on moral superiority, this is difficult to carry out.
People have
a right to know—at least in theory. Spying and covert operations are part of
the daily workings of the state, admittedly sometimes for the greater good
(such as when the police infiltrate a criminal organization to put their
members on trial). But their efficiency runs against their transparency. A
perfectly democratic system would be transparent, and as such, no covert
operations could be effectively carried out.
2 Democracy Is Unsustainable
As seen in
points three, four, and five, a perfect democracy is unsustainable—but a mostly
democratic system can (and does) work. In many democratic countries, your vote
only measures up against other votes in your district. So if your district runs
a majority system and you vote for a losing runner, then your vote was useless.
You can use a proportional system, but that doesn’t solve the problem: the
issue still remains that large numbers of people can effectively “waste their
vote.”
1 It Can’t Really Work
That pure
democracy cannot work is not a personal opinion—it is a mathematical result of
Arrow’s impossibility theorem. According to this theorem, so long as there are
more than two candidates, there is no possible voting system that can ensure
the satisfaction of three crucial criteria for fairness:
– If every
voter prefers alternative X over alternative Y, then the group prefers X over
Y.
– If every
voter’s preference between X and Y remains unchanged, then the group’s
preference between X and Y will also remain unchanged.
– There is
no “dictator”; no single voter possesses the power to always determine the
group’s preference.
If these
criteria are left unsatisfied, it effectively means that democracy—at least in
its purest form—cannot work.
READ MORE A. J. SIMONSON
