188.8.131.52 Legitimacy of Consultations
Voting in a democracy is a way of picking up the preference of a majority, but it doesn’t bring out the concerns of minorities. It is also subject to the criticisms that people can have several reasons for voting and they may not be well-informed (184.108.40.206). Jason Brennan, in his book Against Democracy, argued that only educated people should be allowed to vote in what he termed an ‘epistocracy’; The New Yorker magazine published a review of this book, tracing its thinking back to Plato, under the title The Case against Democracy.
Such arguments would disenfranchise underprivileged members of society, breaching their rights and delegitimising governance from their perspective, but consultative governance offers a way out. The competence that Brennan seeks does not have to reside in all his fellow citizens – but should be required of their representatives during a consultation.
In some circumstances, then, consultation might be more legitimate than universal voting – but safeguards are necessary to ensure that processes and outcomes are accepted as legitimate:
- The nominated representatives would have to be accepted as legitimate by all participants, so credible processes are needed for selection (and de-selection) and they would have to be given negotiating rights. This depends upon the internal governance of each group.
- A robust registration mechanism would be needed – to register the level of support for each group and to avoid people being represented more than once on the same issue – so that it would be possible to know how much weight to attach to each group in the bargaining process.
- Not everybody belongs to an interest group and there is no formal group to represent the ‘silent majority’. There is always the danger that pressure groups and business interests might ‘punch above their weight’ in influencing politicians (6.4.6) and there is a risk of this causing distortions in decision-making. For some issues, consultation with groups may need to be supplemented by polling opinions across the whole breadth of the affected portion of the population.
- Different opinions will be expressed and reaching a decision will require more than just adding up votes. If building a new road would require the demolition of a factory for example, many people might vote for the bypass and the few people who worked in the factory would be outnumbered – yet each worker’s personal loss could be much greater than the personal benefit of somebody using the bypass. Politicians needs a basis for weighing the different opinions before reaching decisions and they then need to explain to people how they have done this.
Provided that all of the above safeguards are present, consultation can greatly increase people’s confidence that their government is taking proper account of their interests. Policies can be seen to be adaptable and inclusive: accommodating minorities and sectional interests where it is possible to do so without infringing the rights of the majority.
Consultative governance is being implemented in some democracies; in a British example, HS2 launches public consultations on plans to extend the railway north. Authoritarian governments, to ensure their long-term survival, also have an interest in improving their communications with the people; the Chinese government, for example, has been experimenting with consultation (220.127.116.11).
This is a current page, from the Patterns of Power Edition 3a book, © PatternsofPower.org, 2020. An archived copy of it is held at https://www.patternsofpower.org/edition03/6533a.htm