Tyranny of the Majority Case Study: Proposition 8
This is something I wrote a while back. Ironically, many of the California voters who swooned over Obama and all his "progressive" policies proceeded to vote for a Constitutional amendment effectively making same-sex marriage illegal. Not only did they vote for it they were proud they did so; such an open-minded, enlightened bunch! Anyway, I wrote this in response to all those events and to point out the travesty that is surrendering individual rights to the whims of government (even if that government is a democracy).
Tyranny of the Majority Case Study: Proposition 8
On November 4th of last year California voters went to the polls and voted for change. The change they voted for was for a change in their state constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman, effectively outlawing same-sex marriage. This move was necessary after the California Supreme Court ruled that discrimination against same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Those opposed to such a thing organized and successfully altered the constitution to ban same-sex marriage in their state.
In order to change the constitution of the state of California opponents of same-sex marriage put forth a proposition. That proposition was listed on the ballot as Proposition 8. This method bypassed the normal legislative process and instead allowed the people to directly decide on the proposed constitutional amendment. It stands as a shining example of democracy in action and everything that it is wrong with it.
An anti-Proposition 8 website (www.noonprop8.com) features a graphic that says “equality should not be put up for a popular vote.” But isn't that the democracy we made the world safe for in World War I? The democracy that we created the United Nations after World War II to promote? The democracy we have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan to spread? Isn't democracy the most capable form of government for creating a just society?
The Founders didn't think so. In 1787 the Founding Fathers gave us a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. In fact, they kept democracy at arms length of the central government by erecting a number of hedges. The President was elected by an electoral college not by direct vote. The United States Senate was chosen by the legislatures of the various states to be their representatives. The judiciary was chosen by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The only place were direct democracy was enshrined was in the House of Representatives which was designed to represent the People.
The reason the Founders established a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy was because of the very nature of government. George Washington once commented that, “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master.” Because government has the ability to use force it is important that it be as free from corruption as possible. In a democracy 51% can have the other 49% eliminated, enslaved, or empressed by a simple vote. This is what has happened in California with Proposition 8.
In the Constitutional Republic the Founders gave us a simple vote could only go so far. To them, the government wasn't simply the ability of a majority to legitimately use force. Instead, it was an institution whose sole goal was to protect the rights of the citizenry even if that meant protecting the rights of a minority against a majority; even one against all.
While the various hypocrisies of the early United States contradict this goal the principle remains. The government is not the ability of those capable of swaying opinions to oppress those who can't or won't, it is the very thing which protects those whom the general will has turned against. In a Constitutional Republic the rights of a few can not be taken away by the votes of the many. In the pseudo-democracy in which we now live they can and obviously have.
The Founders established a republic to guard against the emotions of the people. They recognized that society is made up of multi-faceted, multi-interested layers that compete for power. They utilized this competition to maintain balance and ensure that no interest group gain too much power over the others. They feared that the emotions of the moment would rule in a democracy and ensured it would be blunted by interest groups interested in more long-term goals. The interests of the People were countered by the interests of the States, the powers of the Executive countered by the powers of the Legislature, the will of all of them constrained by the Judiciary guided by the Constitution.
Over time we have eroded these hedges and allowed those with the means of influence to control our government. The Senate is now directly elected by the people, meaning state governments have no representation in Washington. The President has imperial powers and is virtually the king the Founders fought against. The will of the majority is now clearly placed above individual rights and those groups capable of exploiting this situation are now in charge of the United States. Ironically our push towards democracy has reduced our liberties and made us progressively less free and less in control.
At the close of the Constitutional convention in Philadelphia Benjamin Franklin was approached by a concerned citizen. She asked him if the Founders had established a Republic or a Monarchy. Franklin replied, “A Republic, madame, if you can keep it.” Sadly, we have not and now the tyranny of the majority reigns; all hail the king.
Tyranny of the Majority Case Study: Proposition 8
On November 4th of last year California voters went to the polls and voted for change. The change they voted for was for a change in their state constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman, effectively outlawing same-sex marriage. This move was necessary after the California Supreme Court ruled that discrimination against same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Those opposed to such a thing organized and successfully altered the constitution to ban same-sex marriage in their state.
In order to change the constitution of the state of California opponents of same-sex marriage put forth a proposition. That proposition was listed on the ballot as Proposition 8. This method bypassed the normal legislative process and instead allowed the people to directly decide on the proposed constitutional amendment. It stands as a shining example of democracy in action and everything that it is wrong with it.
An anti-Proposition 8 website (www.noonprop8.com) features a graphic that says “equality should not be put up for a popular vote.” But isn't that the democracy we made the world safe for in World War I? The democracy that we created the United Nations after World War II to promote? The democracy we have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan to spread? Isn't democracy the most capable form of government for creating a just society?
The Founders didn't think so. In 1787 the Founding Fathers gave us a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. In fact, they kept democracy at arms length of the central government by erecting a number of hedges. The President was elected by an electoral college not by direct vote. The United States Senate was chosen by the legislatures of the various states to be their representatives. The judiciary was chosen by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The only place were direct democracy was enshrined was in the House of Representatives which was designed to represent the People.
The reason the Founders established a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy was because of the very nature of government. George Washington once commented that, “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master.” Because government has the ability to use force it is important that it be as free from corruption as possible. In a democracy 51% can have the other 49% eliminated, enslaved, or empressed by a simple vote. This is what has happened in California with Proposition 8.
In the Constitutional Republic the Founders gave us a simple vote could only go so far. To them, the government wasn't simply the ability of a majority to legitimately use force. Instead, it was an institution whose sole goal was to protect the rights of the citizenry even if that meant protecting the rights of a minority against a majority; even one against all.
While the various hypocrisies of the early United States contradict this goal the principle remains. The government is not the ability of those capable of swaying opinions to oppress those who can't or won't, it is the very thing which protects those whom the general will has turned against. In a Constitutional Republic the rights of a few can not be taken away by the votes of the many. In the pseudo-democracy in which we now live they can and obviously have.
The Founders established a republic to guard against the emotions of the people. They recognized that society is made up of multi-faceted, multi-interested layers that compete for power. They utilized this competition to maintain balance and ensure that no interest group gain too much power over the others. They feared that the emotions of the moment would rule in a democracy and ensured it would be blunted by interest groups interested in more long-term goals. The interests of the People were countered by the interests of the States, the powers of the Executive countered by the powers of the Legislature, the will of all of them constrained by the Judiciary guided by the Constitution.
Over time we have eroded these hedges and allowed those with the means of influence to control our government. The Senate is now directly elected by the people, meaning state governments have no representation in Washington. The President has imperial powers and is virtually the king the Founders fought against. The will of the majority is now clearly placed above individual rights and those groups capable of exploiting this situation are now in charge of the United States. Ironically our push towards democracy has reduced our liberties and made us progressively less free and less in control.
At the close of the Constitutional convention in Philadelphia Benjamin Franklin was approached by a concerned citizen. She asked him if the Founders had established a Republic or a Monarchy. Franklin replied, “A Republic, madame, if you can keep it.” Sadly, we have not and now the tyranny of the majority reigns; all hail the king.