| We don't need a "new theory of democracy" - we need to actually follow the Constitution we already have. The author's concerns about majority rule leading to bad outcomes? That's exactly why the founders created a constitutional republic, not a pure democracy. They knew about mob rule and designed safeguards against it. The Constitution already handles these problems: Contradictory voting patterns: Federalism lets states make their own choices. If Kentucky votes against Medicaid expansion, that's their call - other states can do differently and we can all see what works. Demagogues: Separation of powers stops any president from becoming a dictator. Congress controls spending, courts check unconstitutional acts, and the First Amendment protects counter-speech. Protecting rights: The Bill of Rights and 14th Amendment protect individuals even when majorities disagree. Rather than throwing out 250 years of constitutional law, maybe we should just enforce what we have? The framework works when we actually use it. The real problem isn't that democracy has "failed" - it's that we've stopped following our own rules. |
The framers recognized this failure in their own lifetimes and held to gentleman’s agreements to limit the power of parties while openly anticipating that the system they created would be replaced. The erosion of their informal understanding has taken far longer than expected, but it has certainly occurred. Today, the political consensus that could allow for the creation of a viable replacement no longer exists. History shows whatever follows from this is often very unpleasant.