justifying democracy-value Flashcards
(10 cards)
conclusion opinion - how do we justify democracy?
justified intrinsically and instrumentally.
it would not make sense to say that democracy did not have instrumental value - achieve the consequential ends it was set out to do, but this doesn’t mean it is not valued intrinsically- it is something we have historically valued in itself - this can be supported by the consistent demand for universal suffrage.
Anderson makes a very valid point - even if dictatorships could give the people everything they wanted, as the government of Singapore claims that it does, citizens would still want to govern themselves through democratic means. - there must be some intrinsic value!
what are the 3 arguments for the instrumental value of democracy?
- Arneson - political power only justified when it has the result of protecting our rights/what we value.
- consequentialism- democracy produces the best conseuqences - long term (mill) and historically
- beneficial effects on our character
what is the first argument for instrumental value of democracy?
Arneson - political power is only justified when it has the result of protecting our rights/what we value. This is because excercising power over someone else should not be taken lightly as it does limit our freedom. Democracy is the only political system that does result in the protection of our rights and what we value, therefore instrumentally it has value. if a democracy ceased to do this, it is moral that it should be abandoned- hence why it has to have extrinsic value.
what is the second argument for instrumental value of democracy?
Mill- consequentialism.
- Democracy produces long term consequential happiness for the greatest number of people enabling political progress. e.g. historically - votes for women, civil rights etc..
- the larger the electorate, the best consequential decisions for all are made- this is a key consequential feature of single vote democracy.
- democracy also has the consequential effect of more freedom of the press which is historically valuable instrumentally with a key correlation with the other dictatorial side of the spectrum - with totalitarian stalinist and maoist regimes leading to mass death and limited socio-political progress.
what is the third argument for instrumental value of democracy?
Aristotle.
Democracy is valuable instrumentally as it produces beneficial effects on our characters.
- encourages us to exercise our innate function of rationality through well-thought out research in order to cast our votes and potentially get more involved in the socio-political sphere - campaign/get involved with politics in some way.
what is the objection to the second argument for instrumental value of democracy?
potential millian reply?
Democracy does not always guarantee the best consequences for the greatest number. e.g. Thailand is described as a ‘democratic failure’, political deadlocks, voting in corrupt leaders - does not prevent corruption!, both sides for and against having a second brexit referendum call the other side ‘failing democracy’.
If democracy solely has instrumental value, this can lead to arguments of abandoning democracy in some situations - supported by Arneson, which in theory could be easily abused - increased demands for a new political system.
Millian reply - democracy is valuable insofar as it produces the best LONG TERM consequences and in the long term democracy always produces the best consequences - human progress, freedom and majority rule.
reply - but this is not guarenteed in the future?
what is the objection to the third argument for instrumental value of democracy?
potential reply?
Democracy does not always does not always instrumentally enable our rational development e.g. with the spread of ‘fake news’, emotive propaganda e.g. anti-immigration french propaganda and false campaign promises ‘300 million for the nhs’. We are deceived often into our votes - does not help us develop but actively erodes our moral characters.
reply - benefits our rational characters more than any other political institution - in particular because of freedom of the press - compared to Russia.
further reply - still can’t argue it is instrumentally valuable - just not as suppressive.
what is the objection/alternative to the first argument for instrumental value of democracy?
it doesn’t matter if we don’t have a consequential focus on achieving our rights if intrinsically our moral interests are embedded in the nature of democracy.
e.g.
embeds principles of liberty and equality.
-liberty - a chance to master our own destiny’s and contribute to the establishment which surrounds our life, potential to get through reform that directly benefits your.
- equality - embeds egalitarianism - right for all to vote which is something we all value.
what are the problems with intrinsic value of democracy’s two values?
liberty - this seemingly only works if you win your vote. CONCEED
equality - other political systems can guarentee equality intrinsically - e.g. lottery voting.
CONCEED
So it seems that justifying democracy in accordance with its values is unsatisfactory.
what is the solution to rejecting sole intrinsic and instrumental justifications for democracy? can it really be justified?
democracy is valuable intrinsically and instrumentally and these values interact bi-directionally. Anderson.
independently, instrumental value can dismiss democracy, the two main pros that intrinsic value provides can either be found in other systems or aren’t guarenteed.
Together however, democracy cannot be dismissed and equality is guarenteed even though your campaign isn’t certain of a result that will be in your favour, the majority still rules.
it would not make sense to say that democracy did not have instrumental value - achieve the consequential ends it was set out to do, but this doesn’t mean it is not valued intrinsically- it is something we have historically valued in itself - this can be supported by the consistent demand for universal suffrage.
Anderson makes a very valid point - even if dictatorships could give the people everything they wanted, as the government of Singapore claims that it does, citizens would still want to govern themselves through democratic means. - there must be some intrinsic value!
