Most people believe democracy is a uniquely just form of government. They believe people have the right to an equal share of political power. And they believe that political participation is good for us—it empowers us, helps us get what we want, and tends to make us smarter, more virtuous, and more caring for one another. These are some of our most cherished ideas about democracy. But, Jason Brennan says, they are all wrong.
In this trenchant book, Brennan argues that democracy should be judged by its results—and the results are not good enough. Just as defendants have a right to a fair trial, citizens have a right to competent government. But democracy is the rule of the ignorant and the irrational, and it all too often falls short. Furthermore, no one has a fundamental right to any share of political power, and exercising political power does most of us little good. On the contrary, a wide range of social science research shows that political participation and democratic deliberation actually tend to make people worse—more irrational, biased, and mean. Given this grim picture, Brennan argues that a new system of government—epistocracy, the rule of the knowledgeable—may be better than democracy, and that it’s time to experiment and find out.
A challenging critique of democracy and the first sustained defense of the rule of the knowledgeable, Against Democracy is essential reading for scholars and students of politics across the disciplines.
5 有用 装睡的人 2020-03-29 00:35:27
由于10000个物理学家里只出了一个爱因斯坦,于是得出结论:一开始就不该让另外那9999个人学物理。
1 有用 Lalalallz 2022-02-08 11:12:20
总体还不错,Chapter 5写得有点丢好感。voter是为了集体利益还是个人利益的实证研究太少,而且是否适用新的选举制度?投票这种行为不仅仅是干预他人/集体,也是在授权官员,但作者只考虑前者并认为不应该让外行参与。如果采取作者的方案,自然而然qualified voters成为一个privileged group,所以作者想先外部解决geographical inequality就能避免选举中的... 总体还不错,Chapter 5写得有点丢好感。voter是为了集体利益还是个人利益的实证研究太少,而且是否适用新的选举制度?投票这种行为不仅仅是干预他人/集体,也是在授权官员,但作者只考虑前者并认为不应该让外行参与。如果采取作者的方案,自然而然qualified voters成为一个privileged group,所以作者想先外部解决geographical inequality就能避免选举中的歧视,太不靠谱 (展开)
0 有用 红河谷的莲儿 2020-05-05 20:20:31
跟风瞅一眼畅销书。哈,可真敢讲,也不怕广大anticaptalist同行给扣上精英政治的帽子。作者今天出了本学术圈找工作的书,内容犀利而态度傲慢,摆出一副看不起傻叉学生的样子,不出所料被广大师生和求职培训专家骂得狗血淋头(销路一片光明啊,啧啧)。
0 有用 Anavrin-转世 2021-08-03 22:08:39
1、现在所实行的民主政治,是熊彼得的竞争性民主(投票民主),属于薄弱(thin)的民主版本; 2、普选制使很多能力不足者获得对他人的支配权,因此不正义; 3、更厚重(thick)的民主形式如审议式民主只会恶化政治讨论; 4、保障基本自由的贤者统治要好于民主制。 ——问题是没有制衡的话如何让精英自肃呢?
0 有用 Vita Nova 2020-11-10 16:15:04
最后一周材料是本畅销书。翻了几章,感觉全书第二章列列经验材料就够了,没什么值得论证的东西。
1 有用 Lalalallz 2022-02-08 11:12:20
总体还不错,Chapter 5写得有点丢好感。voter是为了集体利益还是个人利益的实证研究太少,而且是否适用新的选举制度?投票这种行为不仅仅是干预他人/集体,也是在授权官员,但作者只考虑前者并认为不应该让外行参与。如果采取作者的方案,自然而然qualified voters成为一个privileged group,所以作者想先外部解决geographical inequality就能避免选举中的... 总体还不错,Chapter 5写得有点丢好感。voter是为了集体利益还是个人利益的实证研究太少,而且是否适用新的选举制度?投票这种行为不仅仅是干预他人/集体,也是在授权官员,但作者只考虑前者并认为不应该让外行参与。如果采取作者的方案,自然而然qualified voters成为一个privileged group,所以作者想先外部解决geographical inequality就能避免选举中的歧视,太不靠谱 (展开)
0 有用 Anavrin-转世 2021-08-03 22:08:39
1、现在所实行的民主政治,是熊彼得的竞争性民主(投票民主),属于薄弱(thin)的民主版本; 2、普选制使很多能力不足者获得对他人的支配权,因此不正义; 3、更厚重(thick)的民主形式如审议式民主只会恶化政治讨论; 4、保障基本自由的贤者统治要好于民主制。 ——问题是没有制衡的话如何让精英自肃呢?
0 有用 申不变 2020-11-25 01:06:09
我觉得是对全世界disappointing democratic practice (well, especially the US) 的一个蛮中肯的诊断,里面的很多分析完全就是我的心声。Maybe democracy is just a beautiful utopia, and us humans could never let it play out...
0 有用 Vita Nova 2020-11-10 16:15:04
最后一周材料是本畅销书。翻了几章,感觉全书第二章列列经验材料就够了,没什么值得论证的东西。
0 有用 红河谷的莲儿 2020-05-05 20:20:31
跟风瞅一眼畅销书。哈,可真敢讲,也不怕广大anticaptalist同行给扣上精英政治的帽子。作者今天出了本学术圈找工作的书,内容犀利而态度傲慢,摆出一副看不起傻叉学生的样子,不出所料被广大师生和求职培训专家骂得狗血淋头(销路一片光明啊,啧啧)。