Democracy, plural voting, epistocracy?

In a world where democracy has thrown up some strange leaders across countries, an old idea has resurfaced.

In the 19th century, British thinker John Stuart Mill mooted the idea of plural voting where educated people would get more than one vote.

The idea addressed an old criticism of democracy by Plato in The Republic. Plato said that democracies eventually descend into mob rule.

But the idea of plural voting goes against a principle considered sacrosanct in modern democracies -- one (wo)man one vote.

And yet, a 2016 book, 'Against Democracy' by Georgetown University philosopher Jason Brennan, extends the idea by arguing for 'epistocracy' -- voting by the knowledgeable -- to prevent irrational and ignorant voters electing undeserving candidates.

While epistocracy seems extreme, many find the idea of plural voting attractive.

More so in India, where the educated and tax paying voter is numerically insignificant and yearns for a greater say in shaping politics -- only 5.6% of Indians are college graduates* and above and just 2.5% pay income tax.

*According to Census 2011, India's population was 1.21 billion and 68.2 million were college graduates and above.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Europe leisure travel tips for Indians

Eating with your hands - or not

Middle class apathy