What is the evidence for the “tyranny of the majority problem” in a direct democracy context?Have any systems of direct democracy ever been proposed that are specifically designed to mitigate the problem of “mob rule”?What are the main arguments in favour and against general assemblies as legislative bodies?Is there a website or online database of what policies different politicians have voted for?Have any systems of direct democracy ever been proposed that are specifically designed to mitigate the problem of “mob rule”?What are the differences (in principles and in practice) between direct democracy and anarchyWhat about this political process is useful for making the world great again?Direct Democracy and Representative DemocracyWhich nation is a direct democracy ? (At the national scale)Where to draw a line between representative democracy and a direct democracy? [Focus on the *where*]Did direct democracy ever work (in a lab)?Would Switzerland's direct democracy survive EU membership?

Multi tool use
What is going on with 'gets(stdin)' on the site coderbyte?
Why can Carol Danvers change her suit colours in the first place?
How can I avoid dust and bubbles when installing window film?
Quasinilpotent , non-compact operators
Store Credit Card Information in Password Manager?
System.QueryException unexpected token
Calculate sum of polynomial roots
Yosemite Fire Rings - What to Expect?
Why is short-wave infrared portion of electromagnetic spectrum so sensitive to fire?
Does IPv6 have similar concept of network mask?
X marks the what?
It grows, but water kills it
What if you are holding an Iron Flask with a demon inside and walk into Antimagic Field?
How should I address a possible mistake to co-authors in a submitted paper
Creepy dinosaur pc game identification
What are the advantages of simplicial model categories over non-simplicial ones?
Why does the Sun have different day lengths, but not the gas giants?
How can mimic phobia be cured?
How much character growth crosses the line into breaking the character
Why should universal income be universal?
Add big quotation marks inside my colorbox
What to do when eye contact makes your subordinate uncomfortable?
How to create table with 2D function values?
Is this toilet slogan correct usage of the English language?
What is the evidence for the “tyranny of the majority problem” in a direct democracy context?
Have any systems of direct democracy ever been proposed that are specifically designed to mitigate the problem of “mob rule”?What are the main arguments in favour and against general assemblies as legislative bodies?Is there a website or online database of what policies different politicians have voted for?Have any systems of direct democracy ever been proposed that are specifically designed to mitigate the problem of “mob rule”?What are the differences (in principles and in practice) between direct democracy and anarchyWhat about this political process is useful for making the world great again?Direct Democracy and Representative DemocracyWhich nation is a direct democracy ? (At the national scale)Where to draw a line between representative democracy and a direct democracy? [Focus on the *where*]Did direct democracy ever work (in a lab)?Would Switzerland's direct democracy survive EU membership?
I have read about the ways to mitigate the "mob rule" or "tyranny of the majority" here, but is it a practical issue in the first place ?
Has it been observed in a direct democracy context or in a referendum under non direct democracy ?
In other words, is there an example in history where a people officially voted for the destruction of a minority ?
direct-democracy
New contributor
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
|
show 6 more comments
I have read about the ways to mitigate the "mob rule" or "tyranny of the majority" here, but is it a practical issue in the first place ?
Has it been observed in a direct democracy context or in a referendum under non direct democracy ?
In other words, is there an example in history where a people officially voted for the destruction of a minority ?
direct-democracy
New contributor
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
I don't know how widely accepted the definition/term for "mob rule" is, but the question you link to basically defines it as what's more commonly called "tyranny of the majority". Actually that page also says "A term used in Classical and Hellenistic Greece for oppressive popular rule was ochlocracy ("mob rule"). "
– Fizz
1 hour ago
1
Frankly a proper question would be if there's evidence for "mob rule" in direct democracy over and above what's experienced in representative regimes. It's not clear for instance why you couldn't have supermajority rules in direct democracy, for instance.
– Fizz
1 hour ago
3
Historic (and in some places, ongoing) persecution of homosexuals, for one example. The US experiments of Prohibition, and the current "War on Drugs" insanity, for another.
– jamesqf
1 hour ago
2
@time4tea, this is an example of "tyranny of the representative" not "tyranny of the majority" per se.
– marc
1 hour ago
2
@marc wasn't Hitler voted into power on a platform of rather 'racist' policies? e.g. Mein Kampf, purity of the Aryan race. It seems the German people had some idea of what they were voting for and weren't entirely misled.
– Time4Tea
1 hour ago
|
show 6 more comments
I have read about the ways to mitigate the "mob rule" or "tyranny of the majority" here, but is it a practical issue in the first place ?
Has it been observed in a direct democracy context or in a referendum under non direct democracy ?
In other words, is there an example in history where a people officially voted for the destruction of a minority ?
direct-democracy
New contributor
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I have read about the ways to mitigate the "mob rule" or "tyranny of the majority" here, but is it a practical issue in the first place ?
Has it been observed in a direct democracy context or in a referendum under non direct democracy ?
In other words, is there an example in history where a people officially voted for the destruction of a minority ?
direct-democracy
direct-democracy
New contributor
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 1 hour ago
marc
New contributor
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 hours ago
marcmarc
213
213
New contributor
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
I don't know how widely accepted the definition/term for "mob rule" is, but the question you link to basically defines it as what's more commonly called "tyranny of the majority". Actually that page also says "A term used in Classical and Hellenistic Greece for oppressive popular rule was ochlocracy ("mob rule"). "
– Fizz
1 hour ago
1
Frankly a proper question would be if there's evidence for "mob rule" in direct democracy over and above what's experienced in representative regimes. It's not clear for instance why you couldn't have supermajority rules in direct democracy, for instance.
– Fizz
1 hour ago
3
Historic (and in some places, ongoing) persecution of homosexuals, for one example. The US experiments of Prohibition, and the current "War on Drugs" insanity, for another.
– jamesqf
1 hour ago
2
@time4tea, this is an example of "tyranny of the representative" not "tyranny of the majority" per se.
– marc
1 hour ago
2
@marc wasn't Hitler voted into power on a platform of rather 'racist' policies? e.g. Mein Kampf, purity of the Aryan race. It seems the German people had some idea of what they were voting for and weren't entirely misled.
– Time4Tea
1 hour ago
|
show 6 more comments
1
I don't know how widely accepted the definition/term for "mob rule" is, but the question you link to basically defines it as what's more commonly called "tyranny of the majority". Actually that page also says "A term used in Classical and Hellenistic Greece for oppressive popular rule was ochlocracy ("mob rule"). "
– Fizz
1 hour ago
1
Frankly a proper question would be if there's evidence for "mob rule" in direct democracy over and above what's experienced in representative regimes. It's not clear for instance why you couldn't have supermajority rules in direct democracy, for instance.
– Fizz
1 hour ago
3
Historic (and in some places, ongoing) persecution of homosexuals, for one example. The US experiments of Prohibition, and the current "War on Drugs" insanity, for another.
– jamesqf
1 hour ago
2
@time4tea, this is an example of "tyranny of the representative" not "tyranny of the majority" per se.
– marc
1 hour ago
2
@marc wasn't Hitler voted into power on a platform of rather 'racist' policies? e.g. Mein Kampf, purity of the Aryan race. It seems the German people had some idea of what they were voting for and weren't entirely misled.
– Time4Tea
1 hour ago
1
1
I don't know how widely accepted the definition/term for "mob rule" is, but the question you link to basically defines it as what's more commonly called "tyranny of the majority". Actually that page also says "A term used in Classical and Hellenistic Greece for oppressive popular rule was ochlocracy ("mob rule"). "
– Fizz
1 hour ago
I don't know how widely accepted the definition/term for "mob rule" is, but the question you link to basically defines it as what's more commonly called "tyranny of the majority". Actually that page also says "A term used in Classical and Hellenistic Greece for oppressive popular rule was ochlocracy ("mob rule"). "
– Fizz
1 hour ago
1
1
Frankly a proper question would be if there's evidence for "mob rule" in direct democracy over and above what's experienced in representative regimes. It's not clear for instance why you couldn't have supermajority rules in direct democracy, for instance.
– Fizz
1 hour ago
Frankly a proper question would be if there's evidence for "mob rule" in direct democracy over and above what's experienced in representative regimes. It's not clear for instance why you couldn't have supermajority rules in direct democracy, for instance.
– Fizz
1 hour ago
3
3
Historic (and in some places, ongoing) persecution of homosexuals, for one example. The US experiments of Prohibition, and the current "War on Drugs" insanity, for another.
– jamesqf
1 hour ago
Historic (and in some places, ongoing) persecution of homosexuals, for one example. The US experiments of Prohibition, and the current "War on Drugs" insanity, for another.
– jamesqf
1 hour ago
2
2
@time4tea, this is an example of "tyranny of the representative" not "tyranny of the majority" per se.
– marc
1 hour ago
@time4tea, this is an example of "tyranny of the representative" not "tyranny of the majority" per se.
– marc
1 hour ago
2
2
@marc wasn't Hitler voted into power on a platform of rather 'racist' policies? e.g. Mein Kampf, purity of the Aryan race. It seems the German people had some idea of what they were voting for and weren't entirely misled.
– Time4Tea
1 hour ago
@marc wasn't Hitler voted into power on a platform of rather 'racist' policies? e.g. Mein Kampf, purity of the Aryan race. It seems the German people had some idea of what they were voting for and weren't entirely misled.
– Time4Tea
1 hour ago
|
show 6 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
In 1879, California held a referendum on Chinese exclusion that passed the all-white electorate by a margin of 154,638 for to 883 against. It was later codified into law by elected representatives, both in the California Constitution as well as Federal Law.
In other words, 99.4 percent of the all-white California electorate voted to exclude all Chinese immigrants from the state forever. It was a remarkably unanimous show of nativist hostility toward a single immigrant group. Hatred of Chinese immigrants — the “indispensable enemy” — had become the one issue upon which white working-class Californians of all nationalities, religions, ethnicities, and political parties could agree.
In 1901, Alabama held a state-wide referendum calling for a constitutional convention with the express purpose to "establish white supremacy in this State". The resulting convention ultimately not only disenfranchised almost all African Americans in the state, but most poor white people also.
The second one may be a bit borderline, since it involved not only a massive amount of voter fraud in order to get passed, but the poor whites who were also disenfranchised were told that it was the only way to keep from being disenfranchised by the wealthy gentlemen who ran the convention. More information
In 1910, Okalahomans passed Oklahoma Initiative 10 that required proof of literacy in order to vote. There was a grandfather clause included allowing anyone to vote who was also entitlted to vote prior to January 1, 1866 ensuring that the qualification only applied to African Americans. The vote was 56% for to 44% against.
In 1963, the California Legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act which attempted to prohibit racial discrimination by realtors and owners of apartment buildings built with public assistance. In response, the California Real Estate Association and other real estate groups helped place Proposition 14 on the November ballot, essentially nullifying the Rumford Act and ensuring a "right to discriminate" for housing sales and rentals, and was passed the same day Lyndon Johnson was elected president with almost 2/3 (65%) of the vote.
add a comment |
I think your requirements are just too restricting to find many examples.
There aren't that many cases of direct democracy in the first place, and "voted for the destruction of a minority" is a very high bar. There's a reason that people talk about the singularity of the Holocaust; there aren't very many places in time where people had 1) the desire and 2) the means to exterminate an entire people. A lot of discrimination is about exploitation, exclusion, or subjugation, not necessarily about annihilation.
I know of at least one example of violations of basic human rights in a direct democracy though. The people of Switzerland voted with 57% to forbid the building of minarets (which goes against the freedom of religion).
We can also see tyranny of the majority in non-direct democracies, such as the support of Germans for the NSDAP, the support of slavery and Jim Crow in the US, restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries (proposition 8 would be an example of direct democracy), etc.
To what "restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries" do you refer? (genuinely curious)
– Robert Harvey
21 mins ago
I agree "destruction" is too restrictive, I meant violation of basic rights.
– marc
16 mins ago
@RobertHarvey There are really too many to list, but eg sodomy laws in the US which essentially criminalized being gay, §175 which did the same thing in Germany, restrictions on marriage (see right to family), ban of gay and trans people in the military (I don't know the English word, but in Germany we call the right "Berufsfreiheit"), requirements of sterilization for trans people (right to bodily integrity), etc.
– tim
13 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
marc is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39702%2fwhat-is-the-evidence-for-the-tyranny-of-the-majority-problem-in-a-direct-democ%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In 1879, California held a referendum on Chinese exclusion that passed the all-white electorate by a margin of 154,638 for to 883 against. It was later codified into law by elected representatives, both in the California Constitution as well as Federal Law.
In other words, 99.4 percent of the all-white California electorate voted to exclude all Chinese immigrants from the state forever. It was a remarkably unanimous show of nativist hostility toward a single immigrant group. Hatred of Chinese immigrants — the “indispensable enemy” — had become the one issue upon which white working-class Californians of all nationalities, religions, ethnicities, and political parties could agree.
In 1901, Alabama held a state-wide referendum calling for a constitutional convention with the express purpose to "establish white supremacy in this State". The resulting convention ultimately not only disenfranchised almost all African Americans in the state, but most poor white people also.
The second one may be a bit borderline, since it involved not only a massive amount of voter fraud in order to get passed, but the poor whites who were also disenfranchised were told that it was the only way to keep from being disenfranchised by the wealthy gentlemen who ran the convention. More information
In 1910, Okalahomans passed Oklahoma Initiative 10 that required proof of literacy in order to vote. There was a grandfather clause included allowing anyone to vote who was also entitlted to vote prior to January 1, 1866 ensuring that the qualification only applied to African Americans. The vote was 56% for to 44% against.
In 1963, the California Legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act which attempted to prohibit racial discrimination by realtors and owners of apartment buildings built with public assistance. In response, the California Real Estate Association and other real estate groups helped place Proposition 14 on the November ballot, essentially nullifying the Rumford Act and ensuring a "right to discriminate" for housing sales and rentals, and was passed the same day Lyndon Johnson was elected president with almost 2/3 (65%) of the vote.
add a comment |
In 1879, California held a referendum on Chinese exclusion that passed the all-white electorate by a margin of 154,638 for to 883 against. It was later codified into law by elected representatives, both in the California Constitution as well as Federal Law.
In other words, 99.4 percent of the all-white California electorate voted to exclude all Chinese immigrants from the state forever. It was a remarkably unanimous show of nativist hostility toward a single immigrant group. Hatred of Chinese immigrants — the “indispensable enemy” — had become the one issue upon which white working-class Californians of all nationalities, religions, ethnicities, and political parties could agree.
In 1901, Alabama held a state-wide referendum calling for a constitutional convention with the express purpose to "establish white supremacy in this State". The resulting convention ultimately not only disenfranchised almost all African Americans in the state, but most poor white people also.
The second one may be a bit borderline, since it involved not only a massive amount of voter fraud in order to get passed, but the poor whites who were also disenfranchised were told that it was the only way to keep from being disenfranchised by the wealthy gentlemen who ran the convention. More information
In 1910, Okalahomans passed Oklahoma Initiative 10 that required proof of literacy in order to vote. There was a grandfather clause included allowing anyone to vote who was also entitlted to vote prior to January 1, 1866 ensuring that the qualification only applied to African Americans. The vote was 56% for to 44% against.
In 1963, the California Legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act which attempted to prohibit racial discrimination by realtors and owners of apartment buildings built with public assistance. In response, the California Real Estate Association and other real estate groups helped place Proposition 14 on the November ballot, essentially nullifying the Rumford Act and ensuring a "right to discriminate" for housing sales and rentals, and was passed the same day Lyndon Johnson was elected president with almost 2/3 (65%) of the vote.
add a comment |
In 1879, California held a referendum on Chinese exclusion that passed the all-white electorate by a margin of 154,638 for to 883 against. It was later codified into law by elected representatives, both in the California Constitution as well as Federal Law.
In other words, 99.4 percent of the all-white California electorate voted to exclude all Chinese immigrants from the state forever. It was a remarkably unanimous show of nativist hostility toward a single immigrant group. Hatred of Chinese immigrants — the “indispensable enemy” — had become the one issue upon which white working-class Californians of all nationalities, religions, ethnicities, and political parties could agree.
In 1901, Alabama held a state-wide referendum calling for a constitutional convention with the express purpose to "establish white supremacy in this State". The resulting convention ultimately not only disenfranchised almost all African Americans in the state, but most poor white people also.
The second one may be a bit borderline, since it involved not only a massive amount of voter fraud in order to get passed, but the poor whites who were also disenfranchised were told that it was the only way to keep from being disenfranchised by the wealthy gentlemen who ran the convention. More information
In 1910, Okalahomans passed Oklahoma Initiative 10 that required proof of literacy in order to vote. There was a grandfather clause included allowing anyone to vote who was also entitlted to vote prior to January 1, 1866 ensuring that the qualification only applied to African Americans. The vote was 56% for to 44% against.
In 1963, the California Legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act which attempted to prohibit racial discrimination by realtors and owners of apartment buildings built with public assistance. In response, the California Real Estate Association and other real estate groups helped place Proposition 14 on the November ballot, essentially nullifying the Rumford Act and ensuring a "right to discriminate" for housing sales and rentals, and was passed the same day Lyndon Johnson was elected president with almost 2/3 (65%) of the vote.
In 1879, California held a referendum on Chinese exclusion that passed the all-white electorate by a margin of 154,638 for to 883 against. It was later codified into law by elected representatives, both in the California Constitution as well as Federal Law.
In other words, 99.4 percent of the all-white California electorate voted to exclude all Chinese immigrants from the state forever. It was a remarkably unanimous show of nativist hostility toward a single immigrant group. Hatred of Chinese immigrants — the “indispensable enemy” — had become the one issue upon which white working-class Californians of all nationalities, religions, ethnicities, and political parties could agree.
In 1901, Alabama held a state-wide referendum calling for a constitutional convention with the express purpose to "establish white supremacy in this State". The resulting convention ultimately not only disenfranchised almost all African Americans in the state, but most poor white people also.
The second one may be a bit borderline, since it involved not only a massive amount of voter fraud in order to get passed, but the poor whites who were also disenfranchised were told that it was the only way to keep from being disenfranchised by the wealthy gentlemen who ran the convention. More information
In 1910, Okalahomans passed Oklahoma Initiative 10 that required proof of literacy in order to vote. There was a grandfather clause included allowing anyone to vote who was also entitlted to vote prior to January 1, 1866 ensuring that the qualification only applied to African Americans. The vote was 56% for to 44% against.
In 1963, the California Legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act which attempted to prohibit racial discrimination by realtors and owners of apartment buildings built with public assistance. In response, the California Real Estate Association and other real estate groups helped place Proposition 14 on the November ballot, essentially nullifying the Rumford Act and ensuring a "right to discriminate" for housing sales and rentals, and was passed the same day Lyndon Johnson was elected president with almost 2/3 (65%) of the vote.
answered 28 mins ago
Jeff LambertJeff Lambert
9,59752847
9,59752847
add a comment |
add a comment |
I think your requirements are just too restricting to find many examples.
There aren't that many cases of direct democracy in the first place, and "voted for the destruction of a minority" is a very high bar. There's a reason that people talk about the singularity of the Holocaust; there aren't very many places in time where people had 1) the desire and 2) the means to exterminate an entire people. A lot of discrimination is about exploitation, exclusion, or subjugation, not necessarily about annihilation.
I know of at least one example of violations of basic human rights in a direct democracy though. The people of Switzerland voted with 57% to forbid the building of minarets (which goes against the freedom of religion).
We can also see tyranny of the majority in non-direct democracies, such as the support of Germans for the NSDAP, the support of slavery and Jim Crow in the US, restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries (proposition 8 would be an example of direct democracy), etc.
To what "restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries" do you refer? (genuinely curious)
– Robert Harvey
21 mins ago
I agree "destruction" is too restrictive, I meant violation of basic rights.
– marc
16 mins ago
@RobertHarvey There are really too many to list, but eg sodomy laws in the US which essentially criminalized being gay, §175 which did the same thing in Germany, restrictions on marriage (see right to family), ban of gay and trans people in the military (I don't know the English word, but in Germany we call the right "Berufsfreiheit"), requirements of sterilization for trans people (right to bodily integrity), etc.
– tim
13 mins ago
add a comment |
I think your requirements are just too restricting to find many examples.
There aren't that many cases of direct democracy in the first place, and "voted for the destruction of a minority" is a very high bar. There's a reason that people talk about the singularity of the Holocaust; there aren't very many places in time where people had 1) the desire and 2) the means to exterminate an entire people. A lot of discrimination is about exploitation, exclusion, or subjugation, not necessarily about annihilation.
I know of at least one example of violations of basic human rights in a direct democracy though. The people of Switzerland voted with 57% to forbid the building of minarets (which goes against the freedom of religion).
We can also see tyranny of the majority in non-direct democracies, such as the support of Germans for the NSDAP, the support of slavery and Jim Crow in the US, restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries (proposition 8 would be an example of direct democracy), etc.
To what "restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries" do you refer? (genuinely curious)
– Robert Harvey
21 mins ago
I agree "destruction" is too restrictive, I meant violation of basic rights.
– marc
16 mins ago
@RobertHarvey There are really too many to list, but eg sodomy laws in the US which essentially criminalized being gay, §175 which did the same thing in Germany, restrictions on marriage (see right to family), ban of gay and trans people in the military (I don't know the English word, but in Germany we call the right "Berufsfreiheit"), requirements of sterilization for trans people (right to bodily integrity), etc.
– tim
13 mins ago
add a comment |
I think your requirements are just too restricting to find many examples.
There aren't that many cases of direct democracy in the first place, and "voted for the destruction of a minority" is a very high bar. There's a reason that people talk about the singularity of the Holocaust; there aren't very many places in time where people had 1) the desire and 2) the means to exterminate an entire people. A lot of discrimination is about exploitation, exclusion, or subjugation, not necessarily about annihilation.
I know of at least one example of violations of basic human rights in a direct democracy though. The people of Switzerland voted with 57% to forbid the building of minarets (which goes against the freedom of religion).
We can also see tyranny of the majority in non-direct democracies, such as the support of Germans for the NSDAP, the support of slavery and Jim Crow in the US, restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries (proposition 8 would be an example of direct democracy), etc.
I think your requirements are just too restricting to find many examples.
There aren't that many cases of direct democracy in the first place, and "voted for the destruction of a minority" is a very high bar. There's a reason that people talk about the singularity of the Holocaust; there aren't very many places in time where people had 1) the desire and 2) the means to exterminate an entire people. A lot of discrimination is about exploitation, exclusion, or subjugation, not necessarily about annihilation.
I know of at least one example of violations of basic human rights in a direct democracy though. The people of Switzerland voted with 57% to forbid the building of minarets (which goes against the freedom of religion).
We can also see tyranny of the majority in non-direct democracies, such as the support of Germans for the NSDAP, the support of slavery and Jim Crow in the US, restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries (proposition 8 would be an example of direct democracy), etc.
edited 24 mins ago
answered 31 mins ago
timtim
17.8k94779
17.8k94779
To what "restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries" do you refer? (genuinely curious)
– Robert Harvey
21 mins ago
I agree "destruction" is too restrictive, I meant violation of basic rights.
– marc
16 mins ago
@RobertHarvey There are really too many to list, but eg sodomy laws in the US which essentially criminalized being gay, §175 which did the same thing in Germany, restrictions on marriage (see right to family), ban of gay and trans people in the military (I don't know the English word, but in Germany we call the right "Berufsfreiheit"), requirements of sterilization for trans people (right to bodily integrity), etc.
– tim
13 mins ago
add a comment |
To what "restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries" do you refer? (genuinely curious)
– Robert Harvey
21 mins ago
I agree "destruction" is too restrictive, I meant violation of basic rights.
– marc
16 mins ago
@RobertHarvey There are really too many to list, but eg sodomy laws in the US which essentially criminalized being gay, §175 which did the same thing in Germany, restrictions on marriage (see right to family), ban of gay and trans people in the military (I don't know the English word, but in Germany we call the right "Berufsfreiheit"), requirements of sterilization for trans people (right to bodily integrity), etc.
– tim
13 mins ago
To what "restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries" do you refer? (genuinely curious)
– Robert Harvey
21 mins ago
To what "restrictions of basic human rights for LGBT people for much of the 20th century in western countries" do you refer? (genuinely curious)
– Robert Harvey
21 mins ago
I agree "destruction" is too restrictive, I meant violation of basic rights.
– marc
16 mins ago
I agree "destruction" is too restrictive, I meant violation of basic rights.
– marc
16 mins ago
@RobertHarvey There are really too many to list, but eg sodomy laws in the US which essentially criminalized being gay, §175 which did the same thing in Germany, restrictions on marriage (see right to family), ban of gay and trans people in the military (I don't know the English word, but in Germany we call the right "Berufsfreiheit"), requirements of sterilization for trans people (right to bodily integrity), etc.
– tim
13 mins ago
@RobertHarvey There are really too many to list, but eg sodomy laws in the US which essentially criminalized being gay, §175 which did the same thing in Germany, restrictions on marriage (see right to family), ban of gay and trans people in the military (I don't know the English word, but in Germany we call the right "Berufsfreiheit"), requirements of sterilization for trans people (right to bodily integrity), etc.
– tim
13 mins ago
add a comment |
marc is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
marc is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
marc is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
marc is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39702%2fwhat-is-the-evidence-for-the-tyranny-of-the-majority-problem-in-a-direct-democ%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
jWQSObTagD vqwus B4s0QnWU5U3u,5L68Gyal537zv C wYh51dd,Oq6oWpLaHW9Y1U0X,wJ3nvJ811DxTQNp OJNU 2m9uvlT
1
I don't know how widely accepted the definition/term for "mob rule" is, but the question you link to basically defines it as what's more commonly called "tyranny of the majority". Actually that page also says "A term used in Classical and Hellenistic Greece for oppressive popular rule was ochlocracy ("mob rule"). "
– Fizz
1 hour ago
1
Frankly a proper question would be if there's evidence for "mob rule" in direct democracy over and above what's experienced in representative regimes. It's not clear for instance why you couldn't have supermajority rules in direct democracy, for instance.
– Fizz
1 hour ago
3
Historic (and in some places, ongoing) persecution of homosexuals, for one example. The US experiments of Prohibition, and the current "War on Drugs" insanity, for another.
– jamesqf
1 hour ago
2
@time4tea, this is an example of "tyranny of the representative" not "tyranny of the majority" per se.
– marc
1 hour ago
2
@marc wasn't Hitler voted into power on a platform of rather 'racist' policies? e.g. Mein Kampf, purity of the Aryan race. It seems the German people had some idea of what they were voting for and weren't entirely misled.
– Time4Tea
1 hour ago