The Spirit of Compromise: Why Governing Demands It and Campaigning Undermines It by Amy Gutmann & Dennis Thompson

Author:Amy Gutmann & Dennis Thompson [Gutmann, Amy & Thompson, Dennis]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Philosophy, Democracy, Political Ideologies, Political Science, Political Process, American Government, Political, Politics, General
ISBN: 9780691153919
Google: 0J7-wAEACAAJ
Goodreads: 13670191
Publisher: Princeton University Press
Published: 2012-04-22T00:00:00+00:00

Two Conceptions of Democracy

This picture of campaigning does not fit well with the classic ideal of a citizen that some democratic theorists favor—an open-minded individual listening to all sides, carefully considering the issues, and coming to a well-informed conclusion. It might seem especially unfriendly toward a deliberative conception of democracy. Deliberative democrats advocate vigorous debate—which campaigning favors. But they also ask politicians to stand ready to acknowledge error, modify their positions as new evidence and better arguments come to light, and accommodate opponents’ views as far as possible to make political progress—all of which campaigning shuns.

Yet deliberative democrats do not believe that deliberation should happen all—or even most—of the time. They can recognize that campaigns are not a promising environment for deliberation. It would be not only unrealistic but also undesirable to try to convert campaigns into prime sites for deliberation. That would undermine the strategically competitive character of campaigning. To the extent that the candidates who would be best at governing decide to try to campaign by being best at deliberating, they would quickly become the worst at winning. They would lose the opportunity to govern. The best would become the worst.

Deliberative democrats can still consistently argue that the quality of campaign discussion should be improved, and that debates should provide opportunities for constructive dialogue. But they too must recognize that campaigns by their nature are strategic and competitive interactions, not deliberative exchanges. Campaigns do not serve their function if opponents are cooperating when they should be competing. Reason-giving in such circumstances tends to be exclusively strategic. It provides a poor model for the more robust deliberation that should take place before and after a campaign. The habits of deliberation need to be cultivated elsewhere.16

Does this account of campaigning then favor a competitive conception of democracy? Joseph Schumpeter, the seminal proponent of the competitive conception, defined democracy as “that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote.”17 The requisites of campaigning constitute a competitive process that could well be regarded as a struggle. But Schumpeter developed this idea of competition in a highly elitist direction, which is neither necessary nor desirable in contemporary politics.18

Democracy is diminished in two ways when it is reduced to a competition for power among elites. First, after citizens elect a leader, they “must refrain from instructing him about what he is to do.”19 The “no backseat driving rule” is intended to leave elites free to govern without the pressures of campaigning.20 This leads to a more rigid division between campaigning and governing than a robust democracy should permit. Even while governing, politicians have to try to build support for their policies and respond to criticisms of their policies. As we have argued, campaigning and its uncompromising mindset should play a role in governing, but the role should be in deference to—not in domination of—the goals of governing.

A second elitist feature in Schumpeter’s conception also dilutes democracy. His

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.