Government is an ongoing process. Any single referendum
aimed at making a binding decision on some issue is not an ongoing process. Any
such referendum is of course a process, but it is a process designed to bring about
closure if the possibility of a further referendum is excluded. In this posting
I will argue that accepting the result of some types of referendums, such as
the Brexit one, is damaging to good government and is fundamentally
undemocratic.
Democracy might be defined as the belief in freedom and
equality among people. Democratic government might be defined as “a system
of government in which all the people of a country can vote to elect their
representatives.” (1) The two definitions
are connected because if people aren’t free they can’t govern themselves. What
does it mean to govern oneself? The ability to govern oneself is the ability to
make decisions without being deceived or coerced and to enact those decisions.
The ability to govern a state is much the same. It is the ability to decide
which policies a state wishes to pursue together with the capability to enact
them. The ability to govern of course applies to both dictatorships and
democratic states. Democratic government takes place by its citizens
determining its policies either directly, through such means as referendums, or
by electing representatives. Personal
government must of necessity be an ongoing process. Let us
assume someone governs herself and that she decides at time t1 doing x is best
thing for her to do. Let us next assume at time t2 and in a roughly similar
situation she finds that she is unable to do anything other than x. I would
suggest that at time t2 she is unable to fully govern himself. To be able to
fully govern herself at t2 she must have the ability to revisit her past
decisions and if necessary revise or change them. Accepting the above of course
does not mean she must change her decision or even consider changing it.
Moreover, any inability at t2 doesn’t need to be connected to any lack of
further reflection on her part, she may be perfectly satisfied with her
previous decision and feel no need for further reflection. However, even if she
simply accepts some decision her acceptance cannot be forced onto her and she
must retain the ongoing ability to accept or reject this decision. The same is also true of states. Governing a
state requires that the state retains the continuing ability revise and if
necessary change its own policies. Governing a state must of necessity
be an ongoing process. States that don’t do so become lifeless and fossilised.
I now want to argue that the use
of some sorts of referendums damage this ongoing process. It might be objected
that provided the electorate in some referendum is not deceived or coerced that
the result of the referendum can contribute to good government. I accept my
objector’s position holds in some circumstances referendums can contribute to
good government. Nonetheless I would argue that my objectors position doesn’t
always hold in all circumstances. I will argue that use of some sort of
democratic referendums to determine policy can damage good governance. Of
course a democratic referendum might help to determine a policy. However, a
democratic government must retain he
ability to revise and if necessary change its own policies. If a referendum determines some government
policies for the foreseeable future, then that government loses part of its
ability to make and change some of its own policies in the future. The above holds even if the referendum
in question was conducted democratically.
In what follows I will consider referendums which determine some government
policies for the foreseeable future rather than binding ones. No binding
referendum binds forever, binding referendums only determine some policy for
the foreseeable future. Referendums can express the will of the people but this
expression isn’t the everlasting will of the people as everlasting will just
doesn’t exist, people can, do and should be able to change their minds. Accepting he above means accepting
that the use of a democratic referendum by any government, when the result of
the referendum determines a policy for the foreseeable future, damages good
government because good government is an ongoing process.
I have argued that referendums
which determine government policy for the foreseeable future damage good
government. It might be objected that I’m misrepresenting the point of
referendums. The point of referendums is to shift the focus from elected
government to a more direct form of governance. I accept my objector’s point. I
accept that referendums can shift the focus from elected government to a more
direct form of government. However, I will now argue that any referendum which
is designed to determine long term policy damages good governance. How can
direct government by the use of referendums possibly damage good governance? I
am not suggesting all such
referendums damage good governance. I am only suggesting that those referendums
which determine some policy for the foreseeable future damage the ability of
the electorate to govern themselves directly. Let us imagine a state which is
governed directly by its electorate by the use of referendums. Let us assume
that one of these referendums determines one of this states policies for the
foreseeable future. I will now repeat my central argument as to why such a
referendum damages good governance. Let us accept that government must be an
ongoing process. This referendum damages this ongoing process. I have argued
that someone’s ability to govern himself means she must have the retain ability
to change his decision and that the same is true of voters. If voters in some
referendum determine some policy for the foreseeable future, then they deprive
themselves of the ability to decide on some policy at some future date. Even if referendums, which are designed
to govern directly, are conducted democratically they can still damage good
government and if they deprive the electorate of the ability to make further
decisions on some matter are undemocratic. Both good government
requires retaining the ability to react to changes in circumstances, any
referendum which determines government policy for the foreseeable future
destroys this ability to react. I suggested above that such referendums in
spite of appearances are fundamentally undemocratic. Clearly any democratically
conducted referendum which aims to elect a leader for life destroys democracy.
I now want to argue that any referendum which takes place in a democracy with
the aim of determining some policy for the foreseeable future damages that
democracy. In a democracy the electorate must retain the ability to shape
government policy. It might be objected that if the electorate have
democratically determined some policy in a referendum that nothing can be more
democratic than that. I would suggest soundness of this objection depends on
how long such a referendum is meant to determine a state’s policy. Let us
assume that a referendum
determines some state’s policies for the foreseeable future. Such a referendum
is undemocratic. Over time he electorate changes. Some electors die whilst
others become enfranchised. It follows that the result of the referendum over
time might come not represent the will of the majority of the electorate. The
will of the majority might be ignored.
Let me once again make my
position clear I’m not saying all referendums damage good governance or are
undemocratic. Referendums which are advisory or determine short or perhaps even
medium term policy need not damage a government’s ability to govern nor are
they fundementally undemocratic. I am saying all referendums which determine
long term policy or policy for the foreseeable future damage good governance
and are undemocratic. I believe the Brexit referendum to be such a referendum.
What conclusions can be drawn from the above? Firstly, referendums should never
be used to determine long term policy. Secondly if referendums must be used to
determine policy in the medium term they should not be decided by a simple
majority of actual voters. At the very least referendums to determine medium
term policies should require a majority among all those eligible to vote in
order to be valid. A larger majority should mean that the result of the referendum
would remain the democratic will of the electorate for a longer period.
