Jeff Miller had some interesting thoughts on the virtues and vices of democracy.
I was thinking more about the Wal*Mart tragedy of last weekend and it reminded me a bit of the Kitty Genovese case—you know, the woman whose murder was famously ignored by thirty-eight witnesses:
…
But in these instances, the actions of the crowd are not okay.
I can’t help but think that the romance of Democracy has something to do with this. In school, we learn the virtue of Democracy … and it’s oversold. Democracy isn’t that great … it’s just the best form of Government we have. It’s the least rotten apple in a barrel of rotten apples. But we teach Democracy as if it’s something pure and lovely and beautiful. It’s none of those things. Democracy is mob rule, and while mob rule is better than oligarchy or monarchy or theocracy, that’s like being the best player on the Detroit Lions.
While I agree that Democracy is the best form of government we have—I do not think that mob psychology is particularly controlling. Mob psychology tends toward the extremes, where as our democracy tends toward the center. First, I think our democracy is too big to have proper mob dynamics. Like an amoeba, if you get too many people in a mob, the mob tends to split. Its hard (or impossible) to have a three million person, self-sustaining frenzy. Secondly, our democracy is too slow to have mob dnyamics. By the time anybody gets to vote for representatives, we’ve had a few dozen news cycles and people have had a chance to cool off. Then the representatives have a while before they’re in power. Then they debate for a long time and it goes to the other half of congress. By the time anything gets done, procedure has shaven off some of the excesses.
In contrast, another form of government might be both smaller and faster. A planned economy might have a relatively smaller government that isn’t accountable to anybody that could get mobbish. Dictators are, as often as not, incredibly popular and will often try to please the mob’s latest whims in an effort to keep power.
In fact, a proper democracy should be antithetical to a mob rule. Mobs (for better or worse) tend to be fairly single-minded. Our democracy, on the other hand, has many voices and considers dissent, consensus, and compromise. There are many voices—and hopefully the end result integrates of a lot of disparate views and values. (Or to be technical, the integration of all these views and values +c, where c is corruption.) The mob, on the other hand, does not harness individual values. Instead, it claims to have speak with one voice and one purpose. Dissent is dangerous in the mob. (You’ll end up sleeping with the fishes.)
