Mike Munger, chair of the political science department at Duke, has a nice article over at the Library of Economics and Liberty about what democracy is and is not.
Will Wilkinson
The Sweet Release of Reason
Mike Munger, chair of the political science department at Duke, has a nice article over at the Library of Economics and Liberty about what democracy is and is not.
Note the approving citation of Fareed Zakaria:
After all, Adolf Hitler became chancellor of Germany via free elections.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution fully recognized that there is nothing, nothing at all, inherent in democracy that ensures the freedom of persons or property.
I think that might be arguing against a strawman. The question isn’t whether or not democracy ensures these things (who claims that it does?) but whether or not it makes them more likely. I don’t see anything in the article which addresses this issue, which is more of a serious claim.
You can’t be serious about the Hitler thing. The fact that he was a vegetarian has nothing to do with vegetarians being bloodthirsty dictators.
But the fact that dictator Hitler WAS selected democratically has LOTS to do with a proof, by example, that democracy cannot protect against dictatorship.
Suppose someone said, “No dictators are vegetarians. Being a vegetarian protects against liking dictatorship!” I could then plausibly say, “Wait, Hitler was a dictator, and he was a vegetarian. So, being a vegetarian has nothing to do with protection from dictatorship.”
And, so, I *did* say, since Hitler was elected, but became a dictator, elections don’t protect against dictatorship.
As for washerdreyer: Plenty of people DO believe that “love is all we need,” and love=democracy. If you don’t believe that…go out and tell some people! ‘Cause you have already found the path of wisdom.
kgrease
Pingback: Exploit the Worker
Note the approving citation of Fareed Zakaria:
After all, Adolf Hitler became chancellor of Germany via free elections.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution fully recognized that there is nothing, nothing at all, inherent in democracy that ensures the freedom of persons or property.
I think that might be arguing against a strawman. The question isn’t whether or not democracy ensures these things (who claims that it does?) but whether or not it makes them more likely. I don’t see anything in the article which addresses this issue, which is more of a serious claim.
You can’t be serious about the Hitler thing. The fact that he was a vegetarian has nothing to do with vegetarians being bloodthirsty dictators.
But the fact that dictator Hitler WAS selected democratically has LOTS to do with a proof, by example, that democracy cannot protect against dictatorship.
Suppose someone said, “No dictators are vegetarians. Being a vegetarian protects against liking dictatorship!” I could then plausibly say, “Wait, Hitler was a dictator, and he was a vegetarian. So, being a vegetarian has nothing to do with protection from dictatorship.”
And, so, I *did* say, since Hitler was elected, but became a dictator, elections don’t protect against dictatorship.
As for washerdreyer: Plenty of people DO believe that “love is all we need,” and love=democracy. If you don’t believe that…go out and tell some people! ‘Cause you have already found the path of wisdom.
kgrease