The Federalist Phoenix No. 5
On democracy, republicanism, populism and the tyranny of the majority
The most fundamental principle of democracy is majority rule as determined by a majority of the people voting in the affirmative for a candidate or issue. Gaining a majority of the popular vote using the rule of one-person-one-vote provides an important basis of equality by which the majority is determined. It is unfortunate that the principle of popular voting has been labeled and continues to be used as a pejorative—populism—by many politicians. It undermines both equality and majority rule with one convenient word, thereby making it an uphill struggle to reclaim its legitimacy from detractors.
One of republicanism’s core beliefs is that populism is likely to lead to the election of a tyrannical demagogue who would then use the government primarily in pursuit of his or his own political party’s self-interests. The concepts of majority rule and one-person-one-vote are considered dangerous precedents that move a government toward tyranny. In an effort to forestall the rise of populism, and by extension, a tyrannical leader, republicanism embraces the ideal that people should rely on informed representatives to debate and vote on important matters.
It is disingenuous to suggest that populism, if allowed to prevail, will lead to mob rule and so by extension, is inherently wrong and must be avoided at all costs. It is equally disingenuous when the fundamental principles of either democracy or republicanism are applied which leads to the election of a populist republican president who takes part in mob rule, it is not labeled as populism. It is the natural consequence of majority rule—the will of the people. When the same political party controls Congress, the Presidency, and, in practical terms, the opinions of the Supreme Court, tyranny is not only likely, but also difficult to prevent. When an authoritative president rules under such conditions, tyranny prevails, as he weakens, undermines, or destroys any structures designed to prevent its rise in the future. From a forward-looking perspective, we are fortunate to have such an example of this in practice today so long as we use it as a cautionary tale for the future.
Tyranny refuses to look back at history for instruction. It only looks forward in an attempt to be self-preserving and self-perpetuating. History would show that tyranny is also self-annihilating. If the people wait until it self-destructs, the smoldering embers of democracy may be impossible to reignite into a flame.
