PrometheusBound
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2012
- Messages
- 1,824
- Reaction score
- 380
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
First, it is the responsibility of the minority to use free speech in order to persuade the majority to vote for its expansion of rights or at least to tolerate it. So the only tyranny is the minorities going beyond persuasion and demanding legislative or judicial tyranny. Second, a referendum is limited to those who feel strongly on the issue, so it is one minority opposing the other, with the majority seeing no harm either way. Third, on this particular issue, I think that those who vote against same-sex marriage are so frustrated on other gay issues, such as the Boy Scouts, and frustrated in general over their powerlessness against special interests that they go to extremes because this is one of the few chances they have to express majority opinion.Actually -- like damn near everything -- it's not so simple.
Instead of flat majoritarian rule (which, by the way, we've never had here), or some version of oligarchy (rule by the few...on whatever basis)...
I endorse substantive democracy, in which the composition of and weight of influence of deciders of a particular policy or decision changes according to an analysis of how strongly constituents are likely to be affected. For example, this is the core of the principle by which people object to outsiders (those with no real stake in a decision) butting their noses into others' private business, like who they marry. On similar grounds, your neighbor wouldn't have much say in what color toothbrush you use, but would likely have substantial say in what kind of fence (or no fence) is raised between your respective yards. Continuing this principle, the actual producers in a given workplace should have more say over work conditions (including safety, pacing, assignment of work roles, etc.) than someone who merely holds title to a business...and so on.
This would be NEITHER a few ruling the many, nor the many ruling the few, but the many ruling the many...with widely varying subsets within the many being instrumental to a particular decision.
As this is an inherently cooperative basis for policy, it is and will continue to be fought against tooth and nail by various proponents of coercive rule, but a basic part of our own liberation is taking responsibility for change instead of waiting for others to come along and lead the way.