Skip to main content

Tyranny of the Masses

 


I was listening to Benjamin Netanyahu on the radio. He was justifying his change in the law that removed power from the Israeli Supreme Court, saying that it was the will of the people. Majority rules. This made me think of “Tyranny of the masses,” a concept that notes: just because a majority of people are for something, that doesn’t make it right. I am sure you can think of historical examples where the people of a country supported a policy that was demonstrably wrong. When everything is completely governed by majority rule, the rights of the minority can be subverted by the majority.

The framers of our American Constitution knew this, and tried to put in some checks and balances into our system of government. This was to guard against all forms of tyranny whether from a dictator, or from tyranny of the masses. One of those checks is that we have a representative government. The people themselves don’t pass laws, but instead elect representatives at the federal and local level to write the laws. A senator or legislator is not bound by the will of the people he or she represents, but can vote their conscience. Obviously, if they go against their constituents too many times, they will find themselves voted out of office in the next election, but the freedom is there for a representative to vote however they wish. Another check against tyranny is that we have three branches of government: executive, legislative, and judicial. If one branch goes too far, it can be thwarted by one of the other branches. That only works if the branches are separated and not all controlled by the same group of people. If the popular majority forces their representatives to create a law that oppresses a minority, it could be vetoed by the president or, failing that, be struck down by the courts.

Countries that don’t have strong constitutional protections, could find themselves susceptible to all forms of tyranny. Yet sometimes even a strong constitution cannot solve the problem. In the 1800’s there were states in America where the majority felt that slavery was an acceptable institution. In the states of the North the majority felt that slavery was an abomination. There did not seem to be any legislative or judicial way out of this impasse. The country elected an antislavery president. The South could claim they were the victims of tyranny of the masses of the majority North, because they did not want to lose their institution that they believed in. The North could claim that each of the southern states were a tyranny of the masses, clearly oppressing a minority. The South rebelled and we had the tragedy of the American Civil War.

There has to be better ways of solving differences than war. How do we avoid such an extreme? We could do worse that to heed Thomas Jefferson (a southerner’s) words:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

If we all believed that, and lived our lives by it, tyranny of the masses would never be a problem. Unfortunately, the Civil War happened even after those words were written. Ultimately, its about people. Government is people. As long as people hold Jefferson’s words to be true, democracy works. If they don’t, it doesn’t.

Star Liner

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Child of the . . .

  What was it like to grow up as a child in the 90s? How about the 1940’s? Thinking about a child growing up in each different decade, conjures up images in my mind. But that is all they are: images. I was a child in the 1960’s. I can tell you what it felt like to be growing up in the 60’s and 70’s, but what it felt like to me is not what the history books remember. History will tell you the 60’s was about the Viet Nam War, civil rights, and the space race. The 70’s was Disco and Watergate. I remember being aware of all of those things, but to me this era was about finding time to play with my friends, something I probably share with a child of any decade. It was about navigating the social intricacies of school.   It was about the Beatles, Three Dog Night, The Moody Blues, The Animals, Jefferson Airplane. It was Bullwinkle, the Wonderful World of Color, and Ed Sullivan. There are things that a kid pays attention to that the grown-ups don’t. Then there are things the adults ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Bureaucrats

  I am one of those nameless, faceless bureaucrats. Yes, that is my job. Though I actually have a name; I even am rumored to have a face. Bureau is the French word for desk, so you could say bureaucrats are “desk people.” In short, I work for the government. I sometimes have to deliver unpleasant news to a taxpayer. I sometimes have to tell them that the deed they recorded won’t work and they will have to record another one with corrections. Or we can’t process their deed until they pay their taxes. I can understand why some of these things upset people. The thing is, we don’t decide these things. It is not the bureaucrats that make the laws. The legislature writes the laws. We are required to follow the law.   If you are going to get mad at someone, get mad at the legislature. Or maybe get mad at the voters who voted the legislature in (That’s you, by the way). The same thing happens when the voters vote in a new district, or vote for a bond, or a new operating levy for an ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Telephonicus domesticus

Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone from 1877 bears about as much similarity to the modern smart phone as an abacus bears to a PC or Mac. There are just about as many leaps in technology in both cases. It’s funny how a major jump in technology happens (like the actual invention of the phone). Then there are some refinements over a few years or decades until it gets to a useful stable form. Then it stays virtually the same for many years with only minor innovations. The telephone was virtually unchanged from sometime before I was born until I was about forty. Push-buttons were replacing the rotary dial, but that was about it. (Isn’t it interesting though that when we call someone, we still call it “dialing?” I have never seen a dial on a cell phone.) Cell phones were introduced and (once they became cheap enough) they changed the way we phone each other. New advancements followed soon after, texting and then smart phones. Personal computers were also becoming commonplace and wer...
Post a Comment
Read more