MAJORITY RULE

New Zealand Tablet, 27 November 1919, Page 17

MAJORITY RULE

(By tho Very Rev. Dean Burke.)

We hear it said that the majority has the right to rule in political matters; if anywhere in the body politic there is right an inherent, natural right to • govern that right lies with the numerical majority. It took politicians a long time to discover this great obvious principle. I showed in a previous paper that government by numerical majority, by counting heads, was a device introduced late in history. Then for centuries it was merely a tentative plan adopted to settle lighter questions. In clubs, councils, and parliaments, it was found a ready and convenient means to ' reach decisions and so grew into general use. Now' Majority Rule is one of our political fetishes—a fetish before which we must stand in awe and to which we must offer our obedience and loyalty. We are told it is the basis, the vital principle of democracy; it is democracy in action ! Yet one may ask: —Has a majority any right to govern the minority beyond what was given by some previous arrangement? Has it any such right founded in the nature of man or of human society ? An able political writer puts the answer somewhat after this fashion; Surely it is above all things democratic to say that one man is not born with the natural right to govern another. Men are by no means born equal; but one is mot born, except through some municipal or national regulation, subject-to tho will of another, in political concerns. If no

: • . . ;. -X M % •V.V.'T • • . • one man has the right to rule another where -- can b two: united get it? How prove that two ■ men have a right to govern the third ? How show that my two neighbors or my twenty neighbors have the natural right to' govern me ? Whence do they obtain this right? But, it may be said, : Majority Rule is to be applied in the case of large numbers, of political communities and States. The majority in ; such communities has the inherent right to rule the whole community. But the question recurs again whence do 100 men get the right to make their will prevail over 99 men who have perhaps a juster and wiser will? Whence do 1000 voters composed largely of scallawags from the slums get the right to legislate for and disfranchise, for the time, 999 men largely embracing the teachers, professional men and men of wealth and position in the place ? . Do not reply by saying that the numerical majority should naturally and fittingly rule. That is the point to be proved. How prove it? Man and society carried on for ages without the help of Majority Rule. It is therefore not essential to, not inherent in the •nature of man and society. It is. only an agreement, a regulation more,, or less convenient adopted by clubs, councils and parliaments to carry on government. It is no part of the Eternal Law deserving our pious veneration. The modern statelatrist in giving it his homage is placing too much confidence in another “idol of the marketplace”-: too often the work of the demagogue and of the party

majority-monger. , It may be objected why should a minority stand in the way of the majority. In the Bible-in-schools controversy some years ago, you may remember, this was the clenching argument with one party. We have got the numbers, said Anglican bishops and canons, Presbyterian ministers and Methodist preachers. Why should bur will be thwarted, by a minority? Give us the Referendum and we will whip up to the ballot-box shoals of ladies old and young, male and female who will overwhelm the minority by five to one! Why stop us by those —right, justice, no plundering of the weak for the benefit of the strong? We have got tyranny able, by numbers and force, to maintain itself ; the numerical majority must rule. But stay, dear bishops and canons and preachers! You are preaching the doctrine of Might is Right. Your doctrine would legitimate any tyranny able, by numbers and force, to maintain itself; it is despotism, Prussianism pure and simple. A few years ago holy men were not ashamed to preach the doctrine, Might is Right, the majority must rule, that is, —Prussianism. At present they would not preach it; however they might like to act it. Prussianism is not for the moment respectable. Justice, right, honor, protection for small nations, strong guarantees for minorities form the themes of our press, pulpit, and platform teaching. So minorities may stand in the way of majorities sometimes. Again except in the case of small groups, such as clubs, companies, synods, Majority Rule is a fiction, an impracticability. In large political communities, among millions, how can you get at the will of the majority, supposing they had the right to legislate and rule. A majority of the people have not expressly voted or declared for any government, code or piece of legislation ever yet set up. Consider that in most countries women, who form half the population, have no votes; consider that large numbers under a fixed ago are shut out from the polls, that largo numbers are ke'pt away by business, . sickness,

and family calls and that a very large number of those who come, have no intelligent will of their own and come because they get a motor ride or a pint of beer ! So, oftentimes, it is not a majority of the people 'but a minority and, not rarely, a minority of a minority who are ruling your democratic commonwealth.

I may in a future paper point out some evil effects which follow from popular notions of Majority Rule.