VOICE AND GROWTH: WAS CHURCHILL RIGHT?

University of California, Davis ^ | October 23, 2002 | Prof. Peter H. Lindert

[Unreconstructed Selmerite]

ABSTRACT

The debate over whether political democracy is the least bad regime, as Churchill once said, remains unresolved because history has been ignored or misread, and because recent statistical studies have not chosen the right tests. Using too little historical information, and mistaking formal democratic rules for true voice, has understated the gains from spreading political voice more equally. This paper draws on a deeper history, reinterpreting five key experiences to show how the institutional channels linking voice and growth are themselves evolving with the economy. Up to about the early nineteenth century, the key institutional link was property rights and contract enforcement. Since the early nineteenth century, the human-investment channel has assumed an ever-greater role. This trend will probably continue. A telltale sign of damage to growth from elite rule is the under-investment of public funds in egalitarian human capital, especially primary schooling, relative to historical norms for successful economies.

On the afternoon of November 11th, 1947, the Opposition leader Winston Churchill gave the House of Commons, and posterity, his famous defense of democracy:

No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time; but there is the broad feeling in our country that the people should rule, continuously rule, and that public opinion, expressed by all constitutional means, should shape, guide, and control the actions of Ministers who are their servants and not their masters....”¹

In fact, Churchill was trying to block the advance of democracy on that November day. He was defending the power of the House of Lords to block measures advanced by a popularly elected government.

[The_Victor]

Welcome to Free Republic

[M Kehoe]

Start with a false premise...

A telltale sign of damage to growth from elite rule is the under-investment of public funds in egalitarian human capital, especially primary schooling, relative to historical norms for successful economies.

...and you end up with the wrong conclusion. Karl Marx would be proud.

Welcome to FR.

5.56mm

[The_Victor]

That's quite a highschool termpaper-like tome. Did you have a point in sharing it with us?

[kingsurfer]

I absolutely agree with you!

Blair wants to replace the Lords with his own "Supreme Court". I am very much against this. If we are to have a change to the bases of Government in the UK then there should be a referendum.

I am voting Conservative at the next election for this issue alone.

[The_Victor]

Are you still here, or just a hit and run poster?

AdmMod: An account to watch perhaps.

[sergeantdave]

Is this supposed to be an updated rewrite of the Communist Manifesto?

[Congressman Billybob]

bttt

Billybob

[JudyinCanada]

Churchill ping.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

You got it. That paragraph alone tells you all you need to know. Socialism....forever....hooray.

Don't waste your time unless your interested in 19th century marxist apologetics.

[Unreconstructed Selmerite]

Yes, I did have a point in sharing it. So many quote Churchill to the effect that democracy is the best form of government, and in doing so promote total democracy, where unelected elements have no place. And they are wrong in doing in so.

I do not agree with the author on his stand on Churchill's opposition to Clement Attlee's Parliament Bill, or several other positions for that matter.

Thanks for the welcome.

[Unreconstructed Selmerite]

Thanks for the welcome.

Please feel free to debunk socialism, and expect no defense from me.

[Unreconstructed Selmerite]

I had every intention of returning. Please excuse me for believing that I could be several hours offline.

[hosepipe]

England never ever has had a sophisticated form of government.. About the best the British have come up with is a democracy(they think)... which is Mob Rule by mobsters all mobbed up.. A Monarchy was better.. or even a Plutarchy, both are still forms of Mob Rule.. but better forms.. Democracy produces socialism in every case which is slavery by government.. The Brits are indeed slaves but then they always were slaves.. Kinda like the Chinese or Russians.. That always were slaves to their governments also.. still are..

Not so in the United States..

[Unreconstructed Selmerite]

With all due respect, democracy is mob rule. However, "democracy" is one of the most misused words in political terminology. It is, e.g., often used as a label of a "system where the majority rules, but where there is protection of minority rights".

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn noted that democracy consists of two dogma, namely political equality, i.e., the "one man one vote" principle, and the rule of the majority.

The United Kingdom has already gone too far towards democracy. Of course, moving further will not make things better.

[El Gato]

The British monarchy and Lords are part of our unwritten constitution. If President Bush did something utterly unconstitutional, he would be impeached, because the constitution is what safeguards your democracy.

Not necessarily. A President can be impeached only for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Unless one can construe violating the Constitution as a "high crime or misdemeanor" mere constitutional violation is not sufficient. If it is, then there hasn't been a President or majority in Congress, along with a bunch of judges and justices, that should not have been impeached since at least FDR.

[Unreconstructed Selmerite]

If we are to have a change to the bases of Government in the UK then there should be a referendum.

So if the majority through a referendum approves of mob rule, it's OK?

[Unreconstructed Selmerite]

You provide a description of government in Britain as mob rule, but provide no justification. Further, you provide absolutely no justification of why it is not so in the United States.

Please explain.