« Inequality, unrest & adaptive preferences | Main | Worker democracy works »

February 03, 2011

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451cbef69e20148c84afec2970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Democracy: in defence of scepticism:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Phil

Surely demand-revealing referendums would entrench (and exacerbate) inequality of income. In 1998 I earned £25,000 and spent about £20,000. In 1999 I earned £15,000 and spent about £15,000. It seems to me that I would be under much greater pressure to state my anticipated benefit honestly in 1999 than in 1998. Or, indeed, to lie about my anticipated benefit, if I genuinely believed it to be very low or very high.

BenSix

"Democracy" and "liberal democracy" are, of course, rather different things. If my cricket team voted 10 to 1 in favour of the wicket keeper picking up the bar tabs that would have been democratic but not very just.

paulilc

"democracy is intrinsically good even if its consequences leave something to be desired"

If democracy was "intrinsically" good, could its consequences leave something to be desired? I can see a good thing - like alcohol - having unfortunate consequences, but not something that is intrinsically -- ie wholly? - good.

ortega

As Pierre Manent says: we must love democracy, but not too much.

Torquil Macneil

"If my cricket team voted 10 to 1 in favour of the wicket keeper picking up the bar tabs that would have been democratic but not very just.2

That rather depends upon the wicket keeper.

Scratch

...is like me saying I’m a better guitarist than Abu Hamza. It is uninterestingly true, because our standards should be much higher,

I'd advise him to raise his action and experiment with open tunings.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad