Elitism, Class and the Democratic Deficit: Founding Themes of the American Republic

Abstract

The founding fathers of the American republic had an Aristotelian moment, a subtle experience drawn generally from their aristocratic backgrounds and from the simple fact that their view of government was shaped by the need to have a system that safeguarded the individualistic values of the Protestant work ethic on the one hand, but on the other, also recognised the class-based nature of social and economic organisation. To the extent that wealth and education represent a socially elevating criterion, they were also seen as necessary for accomplishing all matters of state interest. In fundamental ways, this also could have shaped their preference for ‘representative democracy’ over ‘direct democracy’ or what they called ‘rule of the rabble’. The justification for these sentiments has persisted in the annals of American government in such a way that despite its acclaimed democratic credentials, the nation’s elites always rule both in matters of legislative policy making or in the workings of the free-market system. Even when we consider the formation and control of political parties (an essential tool for political participation and interest articulation in liberal democracies), we also find that Robert Michels’ hypothesis concerning the ‘iron law of oligarchy’ still resonates in terms of who leads American political parties and who decides what issues or policies are important or not, and in whose interest they serve. In the end, this work argues that the kind of democratic pluralism so much revered in liberal democracies serves essentially as a ‘legitimating’ force for narrow elite rule devoid of popular consent.