Elitism in Democracy

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 ETHNIC STUDIES
Stephen B. Graves
{"title":"Elitism in Democracy","authors":"Stephen B. Graves","doi":"10.1017/S1742058X21000369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The concept of the common good represents those resources that are good for an entire group as a whole, or what preserves what the people or inhabitants of the national community have in common. The “good” are those things that benefit the community as a whole; lead to the protection, sustainment, and improvement of the community. Theorists agree that it is the ultimate end of government; the good of all its citizens and void of special interests. Theories of the common good are discussed in this paper with implications regarding the shortcomings of democratic political institutions and structures. The theoretical framework provided by the political thought of W. E. B. Du Bois and Friedrich Nietzsche are used to critically examine the idea of the common good in contemporary democratic societies. Du Bois sought an objective truth that could dispel once and for all the irrational prejudices and ignorances that stood in the way of a just social order for African Americans. Nietzsche’s political theory was primarily concerned with disdain for democracy and the need for Aristocratic forms and social ordering. He was skeptical that with the demise of religion, it would be possible to achieve an effective normative consensus in society at large which is needed to legitimize government authority. Both theorists agree that the exceptional and great individuals are few in society and should govern in favor of the masses. Based on their example, this paper argues that both authors are suggesting an Epistocratic form of government where those with political knowledge are privileged.","PeriodicalId":47158,"journal":{"name":"Du Bois Review-Social Science Research on Race","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Du Bois Review-Social Science Research on Race","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X21000369","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The concept of the common good represents those resources that are good for an entire group as a whole, or what preserves what the people or inhabitants of the national community have in common. The “good” are those things that benefit the community as a whole; lead to the protection, sustainment, and improvement of the community. Theorists agree that it is the ultimate end of government; the good of all its citizens and void of special interests. Theories of the common good are discussed in this paper with implications regarding the shortcomings of democratic political institutions and structures. The theoretical framework provided by the political thought of W. E. B. Du Bois and Friedrich Nietzsche are used to critically examine the idea of the common good in contemporary democratic societies. Du Bois sought an objective truth that could dispel once and for all the irrational prejudices and ignorances that stood in the way of a just social order for African Americans. Nietzsche’s political theory was primarily concerned with disdain for democracy and the need for Aristocratic forms and social ordering. He was skeptical that with the demise of religion, it would be possible to achieve an effective normative consensus in society at large which is needed to legitimize government authority. Both theorists agree that the exceptional and great individuals are few in society and should govern in favor of the masses. Based on their example, this paper argues that both authors are suggesting an Epistocratic form of government where those with political knowledge are privileged.
民主中的精英主义
公共利益的概念代表了那些对整个群体有益的资源,或者是保护国家社区的人民或居民的共同之处的资源。“好”是指那些对整个社区有益的东西;促进社区的保护、维持和改善。理论家们一致认为,这是政府的最终目的;所有公民的利益,没有特殊利益。共同利益理论在本文中讨论了有关民主政治制度和结构的缺点的含义。杜波依斯和尼采的政治思想所提供的理论框架被用来批判性地审视当代民主社会的共同利益理念。杜波依斯寻求一种客观的真理,可以一劳永逸地消除非理性的偏见和无知,这些偏见和无知阻碍了非裔美国人建立公正的社会秩序。尼采的政治理论主要关注对民主的蔑视,以及对贵族形式和社会秩序的需要。他怀疑,随着宗教的消亡,是否有可能在整个社会达成有效的规范共识,而这是使政府权威合法化所需要的。两位理论家都认为,社会上杰出和伟大的个人是少数的,他们应该为大众服务。基于他们的例子,本文认为两位作者都在建议一种具有政治知识的人享有特权的民主形式的政府。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信