Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

Sceptical Democracy

Document Cited in Related
AuthorVittorio Bufacchi
DOI10.1111/1467-9256.00131
Published date01 February 2001
Date01 February 2001
Sceptical Democracy1
Vittorio Bufacchi
University College, Cork
Two extreme philosophical positions pose a constant threat to democracy. Those who believe in
the certainty of their beliefs (totalitarianism) and those who deny the existence of any truth
(nihilism and post-modernity) uphold these anti-democratic positions. Squeezed between these
two polarities we find liberal democracy. One of the distinctive properties of liberal democracy is
its endorsement of a political definition of scepticism. The aim of this article is to explore the
relationship between liberal democracy and scepticism.
Introduction
This article explores the relationship between liberal democracy and scepticism. In
the first part, I argue that the threat to democracy comes from two opposing
extremes: from those who believe in the certainty of their beliefs (totalitarianism),
and those who deny the existence of any truth (nihilism and post-modernity).
Between these two polarities we find democracy. In the second part I argue that if
democracy has managed to occupy this precarious space, it is due to a concept that
is pivotal to a correct understanding of liberal democracy: scepticism. It is regret-
table that for many sympathisers of liberal democracy, scepticism is a dirty word.
The aim of this article is to suggest that the rehabilitation of scepticism is long
overdue. If democracy is going to defend itself from anti-democratic threats, it is
imperative for democratic theory to embrace a political definition of scepticism.
Threats to Democracy
Democracy is under threat from two opposing extreme world-views. On one side,
anti-democratic thought is entertained by those who attack the spiritual decay of
democracy for its inability to ground society on infallible foundations. At the other
extreme, democracy is dismissed for being at best a culturally relative notion, and
at worst an instrument of Western cultural imperialism.
The arrogance of wanting to replace reasonable doubt with certainty finds resonance
in two forms of anti-democratic thought: totalitarianism and religious funda-
mentalism. Meaning ‘complete’ or ‘absolute’, totalitarianism refers to a form of
political rule that leaves no room for doubt or plurality of thinking. In particular,
totalitarianism embraces certainty in two separate but related spheres: first, in its
vision of a brave new world, the creation of which warrants the destruction of
existing society and unlimited human sacrifice. Secondly, in its blind faith in
autocratic rule, where the ruler is not accountable to anyone else.2
Like totalitarianism, religious fundamentalism (fanaticism) is also grounded on
pillars of certainty. Here certainty takes the form of knowledge of truth as revealed
POLITICS: 2001 VOL 21(1), 23–30
© Political Studies Association, 2001.
Published by Blackwell Publishers, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT