Penulis : Robert A. Dahl
Penerbit : Yale University Press
Tahun Terbit : 2006
Towards the end of the 1990s, one of Japan's leading newspapers asked Amartya Sen. If summed up in a sentence, the question goes something like this: What was the most important event of the 20th century? The winner of the economics nobel prize in 1998 without difficulty gave the answer: the rise of democracy (Sen, 1999:3). Historical books say that democracy is not taken for granted, both as an idea and as a political system throughout the world. It started from a fringe idea, and along with the ideals of realizing freedom and equality—which were achieved with sweat, blood, and tears—succeeded in becoming the dominant idea, and being realized in many countries.
Recently, democracy has experienced a setback, or in other terms a recession, in various countries. A number of international institutions report that this decline cannot be separated from the effects of globalization, the 2008 crisis, and the emergence of populism at the global level. After the corona pandemic emerged, governments in a number of countries, such as Hungary, even used the pandemic as an excuse to weaken democratic institutions (Edgell et al., 2020). In the midst of this democratic decline, I share my readings, as well as some notes, of Robert Dahl's work entitled “On Political Equality”. At least reading political texts (re) feels crucial these days, because political equality is an important topic in democracy discussions. In fact, without political equality, democracy can be said to not exist.
For Dahl, political equality is a fundamental premise of democracy (p. ix). Ideally, he continued, democracy has at least the following characteristics: 1) effective participation; 2) equality in choosing (voting); 3) understanding of relevant policies and their consequences; 4) control over the policy agenda; 5) inclusion; and 6) fulfillment of fundamental rights (pp. 8-10). Even so, said Dahl, ideal democracy can never be fully realized at the practical level. Indeed, political institutions need to reach a (higher) level of democracy. However, political institutions will not be able to get a perfect or ideal democracy (p. 10). This is because the area is large and the population is not small (p. 11). Borrowing Diamond's expression (2015: 12-13), in the midst of a society with a limited number, say not exceeding 10,000 people, implementing, managing, and reaching agreements through face-to-face discussions from all citizens is more possible than in a society whose number exceeds 10,000 people .
Although democracy is ideally unattainable, based on moral judgments, political equality is a desirable and reasonable goal (p. 6). There are at least three reasons to explain it. First, as Lord Acton noted, power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts. Second, as John Stuart Mill stated, it is important to know the truth of every idea or opinion. Here, freedom of thought and speech plays a central role. Without it, government policies are not likely to lead to disaster. Finally, a number of groups in society, such as minorities, are still excluded from political participation, and their interests have not been the government's concern (p. 5). As Dahl wrote in the opening part of this book, the notion of political equality can at least be traced from his earlier work. In “Politics Economics and Welfare: Planning and Politico-Economic Systems Resolved into Basic Social Processes”, Dahl and Lindblom (1953:41) explain that political equality is control over government decisions that are carried out jointly, so that no one citizen's preference benefits or loses more than the preferences of other citizens.
The question is, what moves people to act in realizing political equality? Admittedly, humans are gifted with extraordinary abilities to reason (reasoning). However, Dahl emphasized that human reasoning ability depends on human experience itself. Therefore, it is not natural (nature), but is shaped by social conditions (nurture). By quoting Antonio Damasio, Dahl also emphasized that reason cannot be separated from emotions and feelings, as well as learning and experience. Feelings, as Damasio said, are inherent in and unavoidable in the process of human reasoning and human decision-making (p. 40).
These reasoning limitations make Dahl a different point of departure from most philosophers, such as Immanuel Kant, in explaining the prime mover of justice or moral action, and prefers to follow David Hume. If Kant emphasizes reason as the guide of justice, Dahl emphasizes the power of feeling (feelings) and passion (passion), such as compassion (compassion), jealousy, anger, and hatred, as guides of moral action (pp. 32-34). To illustrate, injustice evokes strong emotions in people's minds. These emotions are then expressed in actions, such as words or actions taken to bring about more just and proper conditions (p. 39). Interestingly, it is not uncommon for people with privilege to be involved in realizing political equality. At this point, they participate in helping subordinated people. According to Dahl, their involvement on the one hand may be caused by empathy and sympathy. On the other hand, it can also be triggered by the fear of people with the privilege of violence or revolution (p. 44). Regardless of empathy or fear, it was clear to Dahl that emotions played a central role in moving people whether privileged or subordinated.
Dahl also tries to read about the future of political equality in the United States (US). To find out, there are a number of fundamental obstacles to political equality that need to be known, such as: 1) distribution of political resources, skills and incentives; 2) limited time to deal with public matters (only a small portion of the population is involved in influencing political decisions); 3) the dilemma of the size of the political system unit (the smaller the political unit, the more potential for participation); 4) the market economy creates serious problems, such as poverty and unemployment, among some citizens, and ultimately has implications for political inequality among citizens; 5) the existence of international systems, such as the IMF and the World Bank, which may be important, but are not democratic; 6) crises, whether caused by war, famine, natural disasters, etc., can cause countries with not yet established democracy to slip into dictatorships, while countries with established democracies can fall into too much executive power ( pp. 50-76).
From all these obstacles, Dahl revealed that there are a number of obstacles that might increase, and in the end, lead to worsening political inequality in the US. First, the distribution of political resources. At this point, income and wealth inequality has implications for political inequality. Senators in the US, for example, are more responsive to the preferences of rich constituencies than poor constituents (pp. 84-85). Second, market capitalism. Many Americans think that the cost of time spent on reducing inequality in political resources is too great, because they see the benefits that are obtained are too small, if not nonexistent. This view is due to cultural norms (cultural norms) created by market capitalism. Here, it gave birth to a culture of consumerism, and in the end, weakened various resistance movements against it (p. 87).
Third, the dilemma of an undemocratic international system. For Dahl, the influence of international institutions will be stronger. Also, the existence of the agency is important to achieve the desired goals of the US population. However, the management of power within the internal institution is not democratic (pp. 91-92). Fourth, terrorism. For Dahl, terrorism is a form of crisis that might hinder political equality. It is not impossible that various terrorism cases that have hit the US will give greater authority to the executive. The less control US citizens have over government decisions, including through legislatures, will exacerbate political inequality. Moreover, US experience has shown that the threat of terrorism has led to the control and arrest of US citizens and non-citizens, even in ways that violate rights and freedoms (pp. 93-94).
On the other hand, Dahl also explained that political inequality might decrease as long as there is political will to realize a number of policies. According to him, some of the policies can be divided into two categories. First, direct policies that can reduce political inequality, consisting of campaign finance reform, general election reform, and reform of the determination of regional boundaries into constituent groupings (district reform). Meanwhile, indirect policies that can reduce political inequality are universal health insurance, programs to increase savings for the poor, increase in minimum wages, and access to higher education for the poor (pp. 100-104).
In addition to policies and the desire to realize them, Dahl also stated that the success of a consumerist culture will give birth to a culture of citizenship. An increase in people's happiness, or even well-being, will lead them to seek other, more satisfying forms of achievement. At this point, they will find that political engagement is more beneficial than spending money, time, and energy on the goods and services produced by capitalism (pp. 106-107). About this, Dahl illustrates it through people with privileges, such as the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) movement, who are involved in citizen action (civic action) (pp. 116-118).
For Dahl, if more and more Americans realize that wealth does not bring happiness, then they may find that their quality of life can be improved by civic action. They will question the reality of their lives, and match it with the promise of democracy. Here, they will devote their time and energy to working for change (p. 119). Of note, Dahl said that complete political equality is beyond the reach of the population of any country, including the US. However, as more people realize that there is a void in consumerist culture, and give credit to citizen action, they will move the US closer to this far-reaching and elusive goal (109-120).
As a political text, there are at least a number of notes that I can give to this book. Technically, Dahl has already explained political equality in this book. However, in this book, he does not provide any conceptually clear boundaries regarding political equality. What remains is that he advises readers to check out a number of his earlier works, which are not specifically stated. In fact, during his life, he has a work that is not small. This deficiency is a bit more difficult for readers, especially readers who are new to it, or want to know, the ideas in this book.
In terms of the substance of ideas, although Dahl explained that democracy has at least a number of characteristics, he also emphasized that ideal democracy, as well as complete political equality, will never materialize in the reality of human life. Based on that statement, democracy and political equality are safe enough to be said to be like an illusion. At this point, Dahl is like a political scientist who (seemingly) lacks confidence, or maybe is too careful, to provide certainty to readers, especially policy makers, intellectuals, and citizens who are interested in politics, regarding the political system (read: democracy) that brings benefits to the masses. Indeed, no ideal is too high. However, aren't goals that can never be achieved not worth fighting for?!
Second, Dahl stated that emotion is the main driver towards political equality. The question is, if Dahl was still alive, how would he explain the recent phenomenon of populism? As is well known, political actors, such as politicians, political parties and political movements, often play psychological aspects to gain political support, even though injustice is relatively low—to say nothing at all. In the Czech Republic, for example, unemployment is at its lowest level in the European Union, and economic growth was 4.3 percent in 2017. Simultaneously, immigrants and asylum seekers are relatively small in the country compared to the rest of Europe. Despite this, populist parties are able to attract the support of four out of every 10 voters there (Velasco, 2019). The success of populists sometimes cannot be separated from their skill or ingenuity in playing on voters' emotions, not (only) driven by social and economic inequality.
Despite these limitations, this book is worth reading for anyone interested in politics, especially democracy and political equality. Moreover, what Dahl wrote in 2006 is still relevant today. The most recent is the health and economic crisis due to the corona pandemic. As previously mentioned, it is not impossible for a crisis to plunge countries into the brink of dictatorship. So far, the direction towards it is at least visible. Despite raising the US case, Dahl's statement can now be seen in Hungary and the Philippines. The governments of the two countries, for example, are using this crisis to gain greater power. In a dark prediction, Fukuyama (2020:28-29) stated that this pandemic could have an impact on the rise of fascism—in a bright prediction, he stated that the pandemic could revive democracy. Happy reading (back)!
Dahl, RA and Lindblom, CE 1953. Politics Economics and Welfare: Planning and Politico-Economic Systems Resolved into Basic Social Processes. Harper & Row Publishers: New York.
Diamond, J. 2015. The World Until Yesterday: What Can We Learn from Traditional Societies?. Gramedia Popular Libraries: Jakarta.
Edgell, AB, Grahn, S., Lachapelle, J., Luhrmann, A., and Maerz, SF 2020. An Update on Pandemic Backsliding: Democracy Four Months After the Beginning of the Covid-19 Pandemic. Available at https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/b9/2e/b92e59da-2a06-4d2e-82a1-b0a8dece4af7/v-dem_policybrief-24_update-pandemic-backsliding_200702.pdf
Fukuyama, F. 2020. The Pandemic and Political Order: It Takes a State. Foreign Affairs, 99(4), 26-32.
Sen, A. 1999. Democracy as a Universal Value. Journal of Democracy, 10(3), 3-17.
Velasco, A. 2019. Populism is Rooted in Politics, Not Economics. Available at https://www.ips-journal.eu/regions/global/article/show/populism-is-rooted-in-politics-not-economics-3168/