Tocqueville’s portrait of America is that of a society of radical liberalism, not of
democracy: he himself notes the enslavement of blacks and the appropriation of
the lands of native Americans. A government publication in the USA could describe
democracy even in the 1920s as ‘a government of the masses... Attitude towards
property is communistic – negating property rights... Results in demagogism,
license, agitation, discontent, anarchy’ (Hoffman, 1988: 141). Thus spoke the voice
of traditional liberalism!The problem of exclusion
Conservative critics could speak of democracy as turning ‘natural’ hierarchies upside
down. In an historic passage, the ancient Greek theorist Plato complains that in a
democracy, fathers and sons ‘change places’ and ‘there is no distinction between
citizen and alien and foreigner’. Slaves come to enjoy the same freedom as their
owners, ‘not to mention the complete equality and liberty in the relations between
the sexes generally’. In the end, Plato adds with a flourish, even ‘the domestic animals
are infected with anarchy’ (1955: 336).
It is true that during the fourth and fifth centuries BC, an astonishing model of
popular rule came to exist in ancient Athens. A popular assembly met some 40
times a year. All citizens were actually paid to attend. All had the right to be heard
in debate before decisions were taken, and this assembly had supreme powers of
war, peace, making treaties, creating public works, etc. Judges, administrators and
members of a 500-strong executive council were chosen, and since they only held
office for one or two years, this meant that a considerable portion of Athenian
citizens had experience of government.
Despite the fact that some have referred to Athenian democracy as ‘pure’ and
‘genuine’, it was rooted in slavery, patriarchy and chauvinism. Slaves, women and
resident aliens had no political rights so that, as has been said, the people in Athens
were really ‘an exceptionally large and diversified ruling class’ (Hoffman, 1988:
145). Not only was Athenian society divided internally, but the payment for jury
service, public office and the membership of the executive council, the expensive
land settlement programme and the distribution of public funds would not have
been possible without the Athenian empire. Democracy was an exclusive idea: the
demos – the people with the right to participate in decision-making, were certainly
not all the adults who lived in the society.
Surely all this changed when liberals became converted to the notion of
democracy? It is true that after the French Revolution, British liberals began to
accept the case for universal suffrage, at least among men, but they did so very
cautiously and reluctantly, with Macpherson arguing that liberals like Jeremy
Bentham (1748–1832) would have preferred to restrict the vote to those who owned
their own houses, but this was no longer acceptable (Macpherson, 1977: 35). James
Mill (1773–1836) asserts that all men should have the vote to protect their interests,
and then argues that logically these interests could be secured if all women, all
men under 40 and the poorest third of the male population over 40 were excluded
from the vote. In Macpherson’s view, James Mill and Bentham were less than
wholehearted democrats (1977: 39).Chapter 5 Democracy 103