Unjust Democracy

You declared you would be three inches taller
You only became what we made you
Thought you were chasing a destiny calling
You only earned what we gave you
--The Who

Democracy is a system of government based on the principle of majority decision-making. While it is often associated with the form government currently practiced in the United States, democracy was not what the framers intended. The word 'democracy' does not appear in any of the founding documents, and many of the framers were on the record as opposing democracy.

Why on earth would the framers be opposed to democracy? Because democratic systems are biased against the individual. The 'majority' rule principle pits the coercive force of government, and those special interests that can marshal enough votes to secure it, against people in the minority. The freedom of the few is thus destined to be compromised in favor of the many.

The framers understood this, and endeavored toward a form of government where all people would be treated equally under the law. Democracy does not facilitate such equal treatment. Instead, it facilitates predatory action of the majority on the minority.

A nice example of the injustice of democracy is demonstrated in the classic film Twelve Angry Men. A young man with a shady background is on trial for murder. After the courtroom phase, the jury heads off to deliberate. Eleven of the 12 members come into the jury chamber thinking that the defendant is slam dunk guilty, citing everything from circumstantial evidence produced by the prosecution to the man's demographic position.

If the decision to convict required the majority rule of a democracy, then there would have been a quick rendering of a guilty verdict. But the decision rule in jury trials is not based on democracy. A decision to convict requires unanimous agreement. As the film progresses, the observer comes to understand what a tragedy a majority ruling would have been, as the single dissenting juror proceeds to turn other jurors toward the truth.

Which bids the question: If democracy is an unjust decision rule in legal contexts, then why should it be a just decision rule in political contexts?