Liberal Epistocracy

Recently, I have developed a keen interest in the contemporary debates about the justification and acceptability of epistocratic forms of political governance. Epistocracy, in its literal sense, is the rule by citizens who are knowledgeable. Though the term is recent, the idea is actually very old, as it had been defended in one form or another in Ancient Greece by Plato or in the 19th century Britain by John Stuart Mill, among others. The current lines of defense of epistocracy are mostly driven by a growing dissatisfaction with democracy, and remain at a very high level of abstraction with regard to the content of epistocratic principles and the design of epistocratic institutions. In the current context of the crisis of representative democracy and the rise of various forms of populisms, reflecting about the justification and implementation of alternative forms of political governance seems particularly relevant. 

I have recently published an article, which assesses and partially rejects, what I call, the 'epistemic critique' of epistocracy. This is, however, only a preliminary work within a broader project that will aim at characterizing and reflecting on the possibility of a liberal epistocracy, i.e. epistocratic political institutions that are compatible with a set of values constitutive of dominant liberal views. The basic hypothesis is that, if possible and acceptable, a liberal epistocracy could constitute a politically relevant alternative to liberal democracy, in the context of the crisis of the latter in the Western world In this perspective, several issues will require attention, for instance:


Relevant published and working papers: