Comments on: Simon Cowell and the Difficulties of Democracy http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/ "But as things are, the war of the sword and the war of the pens is perpetual" - Thomas Hobbes, De Cive Wed, 30 May 2012 03:17:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: The Conservative Left « Bad Conscience http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-4374 Tue, 31 Aug 2010 11:55:47 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-4374 [...] history simply because it was right to triumph. We don’t tend to pause and consider just how slippery a concept “democracy” really is. Nor do we often reflect upon the extent to which [...]

]]> By: Case Study « Bad Conscience http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-3363 Thu, 20 May 2010 08:42:43 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-3363 [...] democracy is. In particular, I’ve drawn attention to the fact that “democracy” does not ensure all values harmonise, and is not a panacea for soothing all conflict and disturbance. It’s [...]

]]> By: The Universal Panacea « Bad Conscience http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-3029 Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:01:56 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-3029 [...] track all our values. And it is not always the case that more or more authentic democracy – whatever exactly that might mean – is a panacea for a better society. An excellent illustration of this is provided in Richard [...]

]]> By: Grace http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-1718 Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:48:33 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-1718 What is even the point of a word if its meaning is so contested, so many contradictory meanings? isn’t the point of language to provide us with a common currency of meaning, so other people understand what you’re trying to say? seems like people don’t know what others mean when they say “democracy”, and the word has to be defined by reference to other concepts (eg equality, majority rule, fairness) before any proper discussion can happen. plus the word just comes with so much annoying baggage, you can’t say you’re not 100% committed to it without getting an incredulous reaction (unless you’re around libertarians :D)

]]> By: Paul Sagar http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-1714 Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:32:52 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-1714 Alex,

having just rescued your comment from the spam net…

“Is there a position you aren’t doing justice to? What if you think the Schumpeterian conception of democracy is correct – in the sense that it accurately describes how democracy happens to now work – but normatively, you dislike it? So, you can agree with Schumpeter (in a sense), yet still welcome moves like Cowell’s to bring the masses into the political game a bit more.”

Well maybe.

But I think that argument has to go: Schumpeter offers a good description of what democracy amounts to in actuality. However, I believe that there is some other sense of democracy – namely, one that is non-Schumpeterian, and that can be achieved. This other form of democracy is normatively superior to the one we have (and that Schumpeter describes).

But that looks to me like endorsing a kind of democracy which is not only (according to Schumpeter) non-actual, but is also in tension with Schumpeter’s model.

For Schumpeter may reply: this is all that democracy *is* and you’re deluded if you think it can be anything else.

In which case, Cowell can’t be acting “democratically” but engaging in non-democratic back-seat driving.

I’m not, by the way, saying that this definitely is what Schumpeter would have thought or said, or that it’s the only way to take the arguments. But it looks to me like a viable possibility. And my aim is not to displace your argument, by the way, but show that deciding what is and is not “democratic” is pretty hard work.

]]> By: Paul Sagar http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-1713 Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:27:16 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-1713 Ste, Grace:

Philistines

]]> By: Grace http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-1702 Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:05:28 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-1702 It’s fantastic! (though not as good as american idol, unfortunately)

]]> By: Ste For Sure http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-1700 Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:05:14 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-1700 I don’t think the x factor is the destruction of western cultured civilisation – more of a televised singing contest. I can’t bring myself to not like it.

]]> By: Top Blogging for the 16th December « Left Outside http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-1699 Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:04:18 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-1699 [...] Paul Sagar sets up a duel between Simon Cowell and Joseph Schumpeter. [...]

]]> By: Alex http://badconscience.com/2009/12/15/simon-cowell-and-the-difficulties-of-democracy/#comment-1698 Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:19:48 +0000 http://badconscience.com/?p=1439#comment-1698 Is there a position you aren’t doing justice to? What if you think the Schumpeterian conception of democracy is correct – in the sense that it accurately describes how democracy happens to now work – but normatively, you dislike it? So, you can agree with Schumpeter (in a sense), yet still welcome moves like Cowell’s to bring the masses into the political game a bit more.

For what it’s worth, I think it is blindingly obvious that Schumpeter is broadly right. Reading him for the first time was like having my eyes opened.

]]>