Most of us have a preferred political party. Even if we dislike many of its policies, its rhetoric, or its leader, and see our preference as a compromise, this party is closest to our values and is the alternative we’d prefer to govern.
At the same time, it can often feel like we lack any real choice in the matter. If only one party is tolerable, or all others are totally intolerable, it may feel as if we’re just voting against bad parties, rather than for a good one.
If this least-bad option drifts far enough from our values, we may decide to stop voting for the lesser evil until someone offers a vision worth supporting. That is, we may decide that no party can count on our unconditional support — if parties want our votes, they’ll have to earn them.
But should we have this expectation? Should political parties earn our votes? Based on the commonsense view of liberal democracy, it seems the answer is obviously yes — the only alternative would be unthinking partisan loyalty. However, if we understand what this expectation implies about politics, and what real democracy demands, then we will see that the answer is no.
To answer this question, we first need to understand what democracy is. Definitions of democracy highlight that it’s an ancient Greek word meaning “rule by the people” or cite phrases like “government of the people, by the people, for the people” or “the consent of the governed.” We often treat these descriptions as interchangeable, but they stem from two distinct political philosophies with radically different visions of democratic politics. The connection to “rule” comes from the ancient republican tradition, while the focus on “consent” was introduced by modern liberalism. These two theories of…
Auteur: Joseph Gubbels
