Are all arguments in favor of liberal democracy utilitarian?
The same needs to be asked about other liberal institutions, such as free markets, science, human rights, etc.
Would the champions of Enlightenment liberalism give up, say, democracy if something else came along with a greater net benefit in their mind?
Or when people say that democracy is better than the alternatives do they have something other than aggregate pleasure minus aggregate suffering in mind? Do they have something other than concrete experiences in mind? Democracy is grander, or something like that? Democracy is their cultural heritage/legacy and saying it is superior feeds their ethnocentric hubris, maybe?
Would the champions of Enlightenment liberalism give up, say, democracy if something else came along with a greater net benefit in their mind?
Or when people say that democracy is better than the alternatives do they have something other than aggregate pleasure minus aggregate suffering in mind? Do they have something other than concrete experiences in mind? Democracy is grander, or something like that? Democracy is their cultural heritage/legacy and saying it is superior feeds their ethnocentric hubris, maybe?
Comments (2)
Why not?
It could be that each person having a say in who is running the country is itself just, so even if there was a benevolent dictator who could ensure economic and social prosperity, a democracy would still be better on principle.