Is more democracy always preferable?
Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point
Tyranny of the Minority serves as a captivating sequel to the widely acclaimed How Democracies Die by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt. Both books delve into the threats posed by authoritarianism to democracy, with a particular focus on the erosion of democratic norms and institutions by extremist parties. These parties, rather than relying on military force, gain power through electoral appeals fueled by grievances, declining social status, and the scapegoating of marginalized groups like immigrants.
While the two books share common themes, they differ in significant ways. How Democracies Die concentrates on political parties and partisan elites. It argues that if centrist political parties are committed to defending democracy against illiberal extremists, regardless of policy differences, democracy can prevail. The danger arises when establishment political leaders abandon their commitment to democracy in favor of personal ambition, forming alliances with political extremists. Levitsky and Ziblatt identify Donald Trump, aided by Republican Party elites, as the epitome of a democratic demagogue. They contend that the GOP, no longer a legitimate opposition party, poses an existential threat to democracy.
Tyranny of the Minority takes a more radical approach. It challenges the notion that appeals to establishment partisan elites to defend democratic principles and set aside policy differences are sufficient. Levitsky and Ziblatt argue for systemic political changes, including radical alterations to the Constitution. The title of their book is telling. They draw inspiration from Madison’s argument in Federalist 10 that factions, whether majority or minority, can pose a threat to the rights and interests of the community. While Madison believed the republican principle could counteract the sinister views of minority factions, Levitsky and Ziblatt assert that the Republican Party itself embodies the tyranny of the minority.
The authors highlight that the Republican Party has not won the popular vote in the 21st century, except for 2004. Despite this, the party has managed to secure control of the House, the Senate, and even the presidency due to counter-majoritarian electoral and institutional characteristics within the American political system. Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that further democratization is necessary to prevent a minority party like the current Republican Party, which they describe as a party of white voters fearing a decline in status and power, from gaining political dominance. They propose that a democratized political system, achieved through electoral competition, would force the Republican Party to broaden its electoral base and move away from extremism.
Challenging the Status Quo
Levitsky and Ziblatt’s argument echoes the ideas put forth by Robert Dahl years ago, although their focus is primarily on electoral reform rather than attacking the regulatory and welfare state. However, their democratic theory-based critique of the constitutional system aligns them with Dahl. They embrace Jane Austen’s quote, “‘The cure for the ills of Democracy is more Democracy.’ We agree.” Ironically, their own book, How Democracies Die, provides evidence that challenges this maxim. The expansion of primaries through the 1970 McGovern-Fraser reforms weakened parties as institutions, enabling extremist candidates like Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders to attempt hostile takeovers of the major parties.
While Levitsky and Ziblatt focus on the tyranny of the minority in American politics, they do not dismiss the problem of majority tyranny. They acknowledge that governing majorities have undermined democracy in countries like Venezuela, Hungary, and Israel. However, they contend that the American political system has always effectively checked the power of majorities. This assertion is surprising, considering the historical impediments to racial justice caused by majority factions in the United States.
The authors draw upon Kevin Phillips’s concept of an emerging Republican majority, which exploited white racial resentment in the latter part of the 20th century. However, they ignore this history in favor of their analysis rooted in contemporary politics. They believe in an emerging Democratic majority that reflects demographic changes, consisting of minorities and young people who are less conservative on issues of race and immigration. They argue that this emerging majority is inherently nonfactious, while the current Republican Party remains a permanent demographic minority and the dominant faction of our time.
The Need for Democratization
Levitsky and Ziblatt assert that further democratization is crucial to saving democracy. In contrast, Madison recognized the primary control on government as a dependence on the people but emphasized the necessity of auxiliary precautions. Constitutional institutions such as separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism, with their counter-majoritarian provisions, are indispensable for preserving republican government.
The authors propose numerous democratic reforms, including the elimination of the Electoral College, replacing two senators per state with Senate representation based on population, repealing voter ID laws, implementing universal voter registration, and eliminating the filibuster. It is important to note that these reforms are narrowly framed, with the sole criterion being whether they allow majorities to prevail. The authors disregard the potential benefits of institutions like the Electoral College and the filibuster, which may fortify federalism, encourage bipartisanship, and prevent the dominance of majoritarian rule. While some of the proposed reforms deserve consideration, the evaluation criteria should extend beyond the confines of democratic theory.
Considering the reforms advocated and the authors’ disdain for the “dead hand of the past” hindering necessary changes, it is logical to conclude that they ultimately advocate for a new constitutional convention. Although they do not explicitly endorse this idea, they call for an easier amendment procedure. However, this would not suffice if they aim to replace the two-senators-per-state provision, which cannot be amended. While they acknowledge the destabilizing effects of frequent constitutional changes in other countries, they overlook the dangers of sweeping constitutional change in the United States. Levitsky and Ziblatt, as enlightenment rationalists, fail to fully appreciate Madison’s emphasis on constitutional reverence and stability in Federalist 49.
Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt is a thought-provoking exploration of the challenges facing American democracy. While their arguments for further democratization and systemic political changes are compelling, they should be considered alongside the enduring wisdom of our constitutional institutions.
Donald Brand is a professor of political science at College of the Holy Cross and co-director of the Charles Carroll program.
How might the implementation of a proportional representation system, as suggested by Levitsky and Ziblatt, impact the process of coalition-building and governance?
State with a proportional representation system, implementing ranked-choice voting, and expanding voter rights and access. They argue that by removing counter-majoritarian elements and strengthening democratic institutions, the tyranny of the minority can be prevented.
While their proposals are bold and ambitious, they fail to address potential challenges and unintended consequences. For example, the elimination of the Electoral College could result in the marginalization of rural and less populous states, diminishing their influence in the political process. The proportional representation system could lead to a proliferation of political parties, making coalition-building and governance more complex. Ranked-choice voting, although promoting inclusivity, could also lead to the election of candidates with limited popular support.
Furthermore, Levitsky and Ziblatt’s focus on the Republican Party as the main perpetrator of the tyranny of the minority neglects the role of partisan polarization and extremism on both sides of the political spectrum. Both major parties have shown a propensity to prioritize party interests over democratic principles, leading to gridlock and a disregard for the concerns and needs of the American people.
In conclusion, Tyranny of the Minority offers a thought-provoking analysis of the challenges faced by American democracy. Levitsky and Ziblatt present compelling arguments for political reforms to prevent the tyranny of the minority and promote a more inclusive and representative democracy. However, their proposals should be critically examined, taking into account potential drawbacks and unintended consequences. Addressing the erosion of democratic norms and institutions requires a comprehensive and bipartisan approach that transcends partisan interests and focuses on the common goal of a thriving and resilient democracy.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...