Hi, Reading back through The Republic, it seems Plato/Socrates got it absolutely bang on with his advocacy for philosopher kings. What he didn't and probably couldn't predict was that power in the modern age would be distributed across many departments, with many individuals controlling their respective areas of expertise, instead of a single king. In the modern age representatives in legislatures delegate near all of their power to the executive bureaucracy. The legislature empowers the bureaucrats to choose policy, absent from the democratic accountability found in legislatures. But the bureaucrats always have the veneer of democratic legitimacy because the people's representatives could theoretically retract the laws which empower the executive branch to make law by other means, although this runs strongly against their incentives. To my question - if the democratic will of the people is opposed to the will of the executive departments, is there any situation where the latter can justifiably override the former? If the people for instance decided that these shutdowns were not worth preventing the deaths that would otherwise follow, would the bureauracy and the rest of the executive be justified in ignoring the will of the people and enforcing shutdowns regardless? Why or why not? Thanks.
That's a very interesting thread, thank you @Steady Pie It's very difficult to answer your question. I'm neither a big fan of any oligarchy or "the dictatorship of the majority". I suppose that in the long run, the will of the people should win, however if a decision of the majority would lead to a disaster, it could be justified to in a temporary way the democracy. People who lead us have two duties : apply the will of the people and protecting the people. We could speak also of the case that a majority would decide that a minority should be slaughtered or stripped from right. I think that it would be justified for the people in power to oppose that. We could furthermore speak of a wish fo the people followed by a rumour, a fake news. That two duties can be opposed. With time, I'm less and less appreciative of democracy and mob rule, neither of the so-called elite. I don't appreciate anything better. I'm just becoming a passive anarchist, not that I wish for any government or hierarchy to disappear, but I just don't recognize anymore their moral superiority.
There would be no justification for forcing a lockdown of the majority of folks against their will. If the powers that be decided it needed to happen then it is up to them to bring their case to the people. I am kind of surprised that many folks just accept that we need to be locked down without much of a reason from the leaders. They use the buzz words "data driven" and "testing" as excuses. Ok then, show us the data and tell us how you are fixing the testing issue. Otherwise get out of my life.
