Roughly 35% of my published work responds to problems of voter ignorance and irrationality. I sometimes get pushback from both libertarians and non-libertarians that goes roughly as follows: “Wait, so you think average people aren’t competent to rule? How can you, a self-described bleeding heart libertarian, say that? Aren’t you libertarians committed to the view that people […]
In my view, what’s the most troubling argument against my view? I’m not impressed by any of the deontological arguments for democracy. But here’s a type of consequentialist objection which I’m not in a position to answer. From the end of chapter 8 of Against Democracy:
Whether we should prefer epistocracy to democracy is in […]
Eric Schleisser considers himself a fierce critic of Brennanism. I’m not so sure he his, because he often seems to be arguing against positions that are closely related to mine, but not quite what I’ve argued.
“Open the book to page ninety-nine and read, and the quality of the whole will be revealed to you.” –Ford Madox Ford
I’m among his targets, though, like many critics, he confuses epistocracy with technocracy. Still, his main counterargument is this:
Which brings me to the core of the case for democracy. It’s not that the voters are always right; […]
Chapter 3 of Against Democracy looks at the empirical work on how political participation, and in particular, deliberative democracy, affects us. Mill hypothesized that deliberation would tend to educate and ennoble us. But, it seems, it tends to corrupt and stultify us.
In the end, I argue the empirical evidence is much more damning […]