Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Majority rule
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== Minority rights ==== McGann argued that majority rule helps to protect [[minority rights]], at least in deliberative settings. The argument is that cycling ensures that parties that lose to a majority have an interest to remain part of the group's process, because any decision can easily be overturned by another majority. Furthermore, suppose a minority wishes to overturn a decision. In that case, under majority rule it just needs to form a coalition that has more than half of the officials involved and that will give it power. Under supermajority rules, a minority needs its own supermajority to overturn a decision.<ref name="Tyranny" /> To support the view that majority rule protects minority rights better than supermajority rules, McGann pointed to the cloture rule in the US Senate, which was used to prevent the extension of [[civil liberties]] to racial minorities.<ref name="Tyranny" /> Saunders, while agreeing that majority rule may offer better protection than supermajority rules, argued that majority rule may nonetheless be of little help to the least minorities.<ref name="Saunders">{{cite web | url = https://oxford.academia.edu/documents/BenSaunders_SubmittedThesis.pdf | title = Democracy-as-Fairness: Justice, Equal Chances, and Lotteries | access-date = September 8, 2013 | author = Ben Saunders | year = 2008 |archive-date=September 10, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080910032028/http://oxford.academia.edu/documents/BenSaunders_SubmittedThesis.pdf }}</ref> Under some circumstances, the legal rights of one person cannot be guaranteed without unjustly imposing on someone else. McGann wrote, "one man's right to property in the antebellum South was another man's slavery."{{Cn|date=September 2024}} [[Amartya Sen]] has noted the existence of the [[liberal paradox]], which shows that permitting assigning a very small number of rights to individuals may make everyone worse off.<ref name="Logic">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iv1sTJtPEp8C |title = The Logic of Democracy: Reconciling Equality, Deliberation, and Minority Protection|isbn = 0472069497|last1 = McGann|first1 = Anthony J.|year = 2006| publisher=University of Michigan Press }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)