Must egalitarians condemn representative democracy?

Journal article

Lovett, Adam. (2021). Must egalitarians condemn representative democracy? Social Theory and Practice: an international and interdisciplinary journal of social philosophy. 47(1), pp. 171-198. https://doi.org/10.5840/soctheorpract202121116
AuthorsLovett, Adam
Abstract

Many contemporary democratic theorists are democratic egalitarians. They think that the distinctive value of democracy lies in equality. Yet this position faces a serious problem. All contemporary democracies are representative democracies. Such democracies are highly unequal: representatives have much more power than do ordinary citizens. So, it seems that democratic egalitarians must condemn representative democracies. In this paper, I present a solution to this problem. My solution invokes popular control. If representatives are under popular control, then their extra power is not objectionable. Unfortunately, so I argue, in the United States representatives are under loose popular control.

Keywordsdemocratic equality; popular control; relational egalitarianism; representation; representative democracy
Year01 Jan 2021
JournalSocial Theory and Practice: an international and interdisciplinary journal of social philosophy
Journal citation47 (1), pp. 171-198
PublisherFlorida State University
ISSN0037-802X
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org/10.5840/soctheorpract202121116
Web address (URL)https://www.pdcnet.org/soctheorpract/content/soctheorpract_2021_0047_0001_0171_0198
Open accessPublished as non-open access
Research or scholarlyResearch
Page range171-198
Publisher's version
License
All rights reserved
File Access Level
Controlled
Output statusPublished
Publication process dates
Deposited03 Sep 2024
Additional information

© Copyright by Social Theory and Practice

Place of publicationUnited States
Permalink -

https://acuresearchbank.acu.edu.au/item/90x9x/must-egalitarians-condemn-representative-democracy

Log in to edit

Restricted files

Publisher's version

  • 13
    total views
  • 0
    total downloads
  • 2
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month
These values are for the period from 19th October 2020, when this repository was created.

Export as

Related outputs

The good life as the life in touch with the good
Lovett, Adam and Riedener, Stefan. (2024). The good life as the life in touch with the good. Philosophical Studies: an international journal for philosophy in the analytic tradition. 181, pp. 1141-1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-024-02136-4
Property and non-ideal theory
Lovett, Adam. (2023). Property and non-ideal theory. Inquiry: an interdisciplinary journal of philosophy. pp. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2023.2206846
The Loving State
Lovett, Adam. (2022). The Loving State. Inquiry : an interdisciplinary journal of philosophy. pp. 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2022.2058080
Voter Motivation
Lovett, Adam. (2022). Voter Motivation. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy: online peer-reviewed journal of moral, political and legal philosophy. 21(3), pp. 299-328. https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v21i3.1255
The Possibility of Democratic Autonomy
Lovett, Adam and Zuehl, Jake. (2022). The Possibility of Democratic Autonomy. Philosophy and Public Affairs. 50(4), pp. 467-498. https://doi.org/10.1111/papa.12223
What Immigrants Owe
Lovett, Adam and Sharp, Daniel. (2021). What Immigrants Owe. Ergo : An Open Access Journal of Philosophy. 8(36), pp. 336-366. https://doi.org/10.3998/ergo.2237
Democratic Autonomy and the Shortcomings of Citizens
Lovett, Adam. (2021). Democratic Autonomy and the Shortcomings of Citizens. Journal of Moral Philosophy. 18(4), pp. 363-386. https://doi.org/10.1163/17455243-22220001
A simple proof of grounding internality
Lovett, Adam. (2019). A simple proof of grounding internality. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy. 8(3), pp. 154-166. https://doi.org/10.1002/tht3.416
On Keeping Things in Proportion
Lovett, Adam and Riedener, Stefan. (2019). On Keeping Things in Proportion. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy: online peer-reviewed journal of moral, political and legal philosophy. 16(3), pp. 229-258. https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v16i3.794