In this podcast by Heterodox Academy (you might notice that we promote their work via the Domain email) Professor Robert Talissse claims that we can overdo democracy. https://heterodoxacademy.org/episode-71-robert-talisse-overdoing-democracy-why-we-must-put-politics-in-its-place/ By this they mean that while participation in group discussion and decision making is a civic virtue, when you start judging who you will talk to or do business with based on the other's political views you are poisoning democracy.

That's something I was conscious of as only a potential problem when we were designing On Line Opinion, but I now see that sort of intolerance and isolation everywhere. And I'd like to say that while things can get heated here, it is one of the only sites I visit on the net where you don't feel like you are in an echo chamber.

As the podcast says, it's not easy to talk to people you disagree with, and social media is making it easier not to have to do this, but we all persevere here, and for that I think you deserve to be congratulated. :)

But don't just slap each other on the back. I'm interested in feedback on the podcast as well (and for quoting purposes they also have a transcript at https://heterodoxacademy.org/071_roberttalisse_transcript/.

Graeme, I have not looked at the podcast yet; but it is my concern that to some "might is right", that is the majority rules. A true democracy allows the freedom of all opinions to be expressed and lives to be lived without intimidation from the majority, or from any minority either, Like a ruling class, dictator, or ideology. It is in the freedom of the individual, providing they are widely educated that inspired community development.

Sorry for spelling your name incorrectly!

I have listened to enough of the podcast to get the gist of it. I am more of a reader than a listener. I will reserve judgement until I've read the book, which is available on Google Books for $17.85. The good thing about ebooks is that you can download a free sample to see if you want to continue with it.

I agree with what I did listen to. The effect of 'echo chambers' and their hardening of stances was mentioned.

I also agree that democracy/politics is overdone. Not long ago I saw a survey that found that young people refuse to go out with, or have any dealings at all with, people whose politics they don't like. That has to be either sick or sad; particularly when the only say most of us have is a single lousy vote every few years for a single person we will never even meet.

Dear Josephus,

I think what you have a problem with is the recent decision by the majority to look after a minority by extending to them rights that had been denied them by what had been a majority: namely marriage.

Surely though this is one of the best examples of democracy performing a moral function, something that sets itself above 'the invisible hand' theory which postulates “through individual self-interest and freedom of production as well as consumption, the best interest of society, as a whole, are fulfilled.”

The majority sided with the minority without a clear 'self interest' motive. This type of outcome is what should be recognised and celebrated about our democracy.

Dear GrahamY,

In this same light I do have a question for you. You had written;

“By this they mean that while participation in group discussion and decision making is a civic virtue, when you start judging who you will talk to or do business with based on the other's political views you are poisoning democracy.”

I can't see where in the podcast that they mentioned the word 'business' yet you saw fit to include it in your remarks.

Perhaps it is because the topic of boycotts has been raised by our PM and was in the back of your mind.

It is my opinion that very large corporations have but their very big mitts around the issue of climate change and CO2 abatement, dragged it into the political arena, and spent a hell of a lot of money creating deeply polarising positions where there shouldn't be any. They have been the democracy poisoners.

Cont..

Cont..

Include the many millions of Palmer dollars that severely tainted this country's democracy during the last election then if the ordinary punter feels the need to voice his or her political opinion is via their wallet why should anyone seek to claim this is undermining democracy? It isn't, it is just an avenue of political expression that our capitalist system affords them.

If my bank were to fund new coal projects like Adani or Waratah Coal then I would cease doing business with them full stop.

This is the first year that I can remember where I will not have a bet on the cup. The business of racing needs to totally overhaul the way they treat the animals which support it before I will contemplate ever again contributing to their 'sport'.

You might call it my politics making those decisions for me but I would argue both issues have a rightful place above politics and that both are sound decisions given the evidence.