Accessible Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter December 31, 2020

Consensus and majoritarian democracies: Problems with under-informed single-level analyses

Emmanuel Ifeanyi Ani
From the journal Human Affairs

Abstract

I argue that when conceiving or assessing normative ideas about how we should organize society into the kind of ecosystem we desire, it is unwise to completely ignore empirical conditions. I also demonstrate that when evaluating empirical difficulties attending a social system, it is also unwise to do so in total oblivion to the normative idea or objective informing the establishment of such a system. Each of these assessments I call an under informed single-level analysis. By contrast I advocate a multi-level analysis (by which we evaluate both the normative and empirical dimensions of an idea or a social system) or, at the least, an informed single-level analysis (by which we evaluate either a normative idea or an empirical system with an implicit awareness of the content of the other level). I demonstrate that these models of analysis would never yield the same conclusions as an under informed single-level analysis. For my case studies I focus on the various models of analyses used in the debate about liberal majoritarian and consensus/communal democracies.

References

Ajei, M. O. (2016). Kwasi Wiredu’s Consensual democracy: Prospects for practice in Africa. European Journal of Political Theory 15(4), 445–466.Search in Google Scholar

Ani, E. I. (2014). On traditional African consensual rationality. Journal of Political Philosophy 22(3), 342–365.Search in Google Scholar

Ani, E. I. (2018). The question of rationality in Kwasi Wiredu’s consensual democracy. In E. Etieyibo (Ed.), Method, substance, and the future of African philosophy (pp. 251–274). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar

Ani, E. I. (2019). The Consensus Project and three levels of deliberation. Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review 58 299–322.Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, G. A. (2003). Facts and principles. Philosophy and Public Affairs 31(3), 211–245.Search in Google Scholar

Dworkin, R. (1984). Rights as trumps. In J. Waldron (Ed.), Theories of Rights (pp.153–167). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Eze, E. C. (2000). Democracy or consensus? Response to Wiredu. Polylog Retrieved December 25, 2019 from (accessed).Search in Google Scholar

Fayemi, A. K. (2010). A critique of consensual democracy and human rights in Kwasi Wiredu’s philosophy. Lumina 21(1), 1–13.Search in Google Scholar

Hart, A. L. H. (1982). Essays on Bentham: Studies in jurisprudence and political theory Oxford: Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jacques, C. (2011). Alterity in the discourse of African philosophy: A forgotten absence. In H. Lauer & K. Ayidoho (Eds.), Reclaiming the human sciences and humanities through African perspectives. Vol II. (pp. 1017–1030). Legon-Accra: Sub-Saharan Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Lauer, H. (2011). Negotiating precolonial history and future democracy: Kwasi Wiredu and his critics. In H. Lauer (Ed.), Identity meets nationalityVoices from the humanities (pp. 174–189). Legon-Accra: Sub-Saharan Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Matolino, B. (2016). Rationality and consensus in Kwasi Wiredu’s Traditional African polities. Theoria 146, 36–55.Search in Google Scholar

Matolino, B. (2018). Consensus as democracy in Africa. Grahamstown, South Africa: NISC/African Humanities Program.Search in Google Scholar

Quinn, W. (1993). Morality and action Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Valentini, L. (2012). Ideal versus non-ideal theory: A conceptual map. Philosophy Compass 7(9), 654–664.Search in Google Scholar

Waldron, J. (2014). Five to four: Why do bare majorities rule on courts? The Yale Law Journal 123, 1692–1725.Search in Google Scholar

Wiredu, K. (1996). Cultural universals and particulars. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wiredu, K. (2011). State, civil society and democracy in Africa. In H. Lauer & K. Ayidoho (Eds.), Reclaiming the human sciences. Vol II (pp. 1055–1066). Legon-Accra: Sub-Saharan Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-12-31
Published in Print: 2021-01-28

© 2021 Institute for Research in Social Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences