The case for epistocratic republicanism

AuthorGwilym David Blunt
Published date01 August 2020
Date01 August 2020
DOI10.1177/0263395719889563
Subject MatterArticles
https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395719889563
Politics
2020, Vol. 40(3) 363 –376
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0263395719889563
journals.sagepub.com/home/pol
The case for epistocratic
republicanism
Gwilym David Blunt
City, University of London, UK
Abstract
In recent years, the fortunes of democracy have waned both in theory and practice. This has
added impetus not only to the republican case for strengthening democratic institutions but
also to new anti-democratic thought. This article examines the claim made by Jason Brennan
that epistocracy, rule by the ‘knowledgeable’, is compatible with freedom from domination. It
begins by briefly explaining epistocracy and republicanism. It then presents the argument for
epistocratic republicanism: that democracy can be a source of domination and that freedom
from domination can be secured through non-democratic political institutions. The case against
epistocratic republicanism is grounded in concerns about systemic domination and the ability of
epistocrats to arbitrarily set the terms of social cooperation. These two arguments are judged
on the basis of which better minimises domination while respecting its value to all people.
Epistocratic republicanism is found to be less reliable because of the risks of epistemic injustice
that accompanies systemic domination; democracy, accompanied by other republican institutions,
is better at minimising domination and respecting persons. It concludes that republicans ought to
be democrats.
Keywords
democracy, domination, epistocracy, populism, republicanism
Received: 1st May 2019; Revised version received: 22nd October 2019; Accepted: 27th October 2019
In September 2013, I attended the annual Cambridge-YouGov Symposium. Two very
different speakers struck me as being noteworthy: Nigel Farage, then leader of the UK
Independence Party, and Xiang Bing, a visiting Chinese academic. The audience found
them both rather humorous. Farage’s carnival barker bluster about elites amused them.
Xiang provoked snickering by claiming that China’s neo-Confucian culture allows the
most knowledgeable to govern and produces better outcomes than democracy. On the
back of the Brexit Referendum, the election of President Trump, and general rise of
‘know nothing’ populism in the Global North, it is doubtful that the audience would be
as quick to laugh today. Xiang’s argument may seem apposite to many people in the
Corresponding author:
Gwilym David Blunt, Department of International Politics, City, University of London, Northampton Square,
London EC1V 0HB, UK.
Email: david.blunt@city.ac.uk
889563POL0010.1177/0263395719889563PoliticsBlunt
research-article2019
Article

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