To what extent is liberalism compatible with democracy?
To what extent is liberalism compatible with democracy?
Liberalism has an ambivalent relationship with democracy, as liberals are against collective power, but support political equality. In the nineteenth century liberals were often opposed to democracy as they saw it as a threat to individual rights - the people are not a single entity but rather a collection of individuals with different opinions and interests, and so it is impossible for every view and opinion to be respected. Since the twentieth century most liberals have come round to the idea of democracy, and support it, but they still have reservations.
Liberals defend democracy for a variety of reasons. First of all it ensures public accountability. This gives the people a degree of protection against governments becoming too strong. Liberals believe in limited government, and democracy provides this system, as the government is accountable to the people. Although most liberals would agree that government is essential in order to defend the rights of the people, it can also be seen as a threat to individual liberty, so people need some form of protection against it.
According to John Stuart Mill, 'the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others'. Therefore, the role of government is to protect the liberty of individuals against others who may seek to exploit them for their own gain. In the liberal view, government powers should not extend beyond this minimal role. However, government officials may exploit their position for their own personal gain, and therefore the people should have a means of protecting their rights against this risk - democracy provides a means to do this. A democratic system allows people to choose their own government, and remove them from power if necessary.
Leading on from this is the issue of property - according to John Locke, it was crucial that those with property were able to protect their rights against the government. The government has the right to expropriate property through taxation, therefore the owners of property have the right to control who makes up the tax-making body. This idea was summed up in the slogan 'no taxation without representation'.
Also, liberals believe that political participation is important in itself, as it allows personal self-development and political education. Self-development is very important to liberals - modern liberals in particular ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Leading on from this is the issue of property - according to John Locke, it was crucial that those with property were able to protect their rights against the government. The government has the right to expropriate property through taxation, therefore the owners of property have the right to control who makes up the tax-making body. This idea was summed up in the slogan 'no taxation without representation'.
Also, liberals believe that political participation is important in itself, as it allows personal self-development and political education. Self-development is very important to liberals - modern liberals in particular see freedom as the ability to develop skills, broaden understanding and gain fulfilment. Therefore any kind of self-development is very important.
Democracy also allows individuals more control over their own lives - they play an active part in government, and indirectly affect all decisions made over their lives. This self-determination is very significant to liberals, as they believe that freedom is very important, and noone should have power over another individual without some degree of consent - democracy provides this consent, as people are able to choose a representative for themselves.
Liberal democracy is based on competition and electoral choice, which means that all beliefs, social philosophies and political movements are tolerated and can be represented. For example, in the UK the BNP is still allowed to run for election despite being overtly racist and offensive. This is very important because liberals believe that any view, however unpleasant, has to be tolerated, because the opinion of every individual in society matters, not just the opinion of the majority. Therefore all groups within society should have the opportunity of political representation, and democracy allows this.
Utilitarian liberals support democracy because they believe that the best way to ensure 'the greatest happiness of the greatest number' is universal suffrage. Being essentially selfish, people can be expected to base their votes on their own best interests, so if the result is chosen by the majority, then consequently the best interests of the majority will be served.
Universal suffrage is also important in that it provides people with political equality - 'one person, one vote; one vote, one value'. This gives people formal equality within society, and there is no element of discrimination based on class, race, gender or religion. No system of government other than democracy would provide this level of political equality, which is such an important part of liberalism.
Finally, liberals believe that equal access to policy formation amongst all of the competing groups in society leads to an equilibrium - although these groups have different opinions and opposing interests, democracy gives them a political voice and binds them to the system, ensuring social stability. And so democracy is seen as the only system which can maintain balance in increasingly complex societies.
Despite all this, most liberals still have concerns about democracy. Firstly, this is due to the liberal fear of collective power. Democracy can be seen as collectivist in that it treats 'the people' as one entity, rather than a group of individuals. In essence, democracy means rule by all of the people, but in reality this isn't possible because there are so many conflicting interests within society. The democratic solution to this is majority rule - 'the greatest happiness of the greatest number'.
This can lead to what has been described as 'the tyranny of the majority'. Rather than an agreement amongst all the people, as it should be, democracy comes down to the rule of the 51%. Minority interests and individual views are disregarded, and the majority rules. This goes completely against the liberal belief that every individual is equally important. As J S Mill said, 'If all of mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind'. Therefore liberals cannot fully accept democracy because it does not respect all individual views.
In the past, liberals have objected to democracy because of the actual make-up of the majority. The liberal view is that those most able to rule should do so, but in modern, industrialised society the majority tends to be made up of uneducated workers, yet these are the people with all the power to elect representatives, simply because there are more of them than there are educated rich people. According to J S Mill, the uneducated tend to act according to narrow class interests whereas more educated people will see a wider perspective, and use their wisdom for general benefit, so only those with sufficient education should be allowed to vote. Although this is rather a drastic view, many liberals would agree with earlier political thinkers such as Plato and Aristotle in describing democracy as rule by the masses at the expense of wisdom and property.
Liberals have also argued that democratic pressures have led to an increase in interventionist government. Liberals, particularly classical liberals, are deeply opposed to government economic intervention as they feel it destabilises the market economy. They feel that the economy works better when left alone, as it is self-regulating, and this also links with the liberal idea of limited government - the state should not become involved with the economy, or any other matter which does not concern the protection and defence of human rights.
In conclusion liberalism is not entirely compatible with democracy - some important liberal ideas, in particular the principle that every individual opinion should be taken into account, directly conflict with the system of democracy. However, in many other ways democracy does correspond with liberal values - it provides political equality for example, and protects the rights of the people against overly strong governments. In general, I feel that liberalism has been able to adapt and fit in with democracy, despite the problem of trying to balance popular participation against the protection of individual rights.
Meghan Rimmer February 2006
Politics - Liberalism
