Expertise/Mass Opinion

Since ancient times, the most basic definitions of democracy have involved the principle of people governing themselves. But do people always know what is best for them? Should the opinions of the masses guide decision-making, or is this better left to experts? Sometimes the experts are wrong and sometimes mass opinion is wrong, therefore, we need a balance between the two. Perhaps we should be governed by a combination of both expert and mass – or popular – opinion, but how exactly should this power be divided and who gets to be an expert?

In the past – both recent and ancient – scores of people have been denied the opportunity to exercise their talents and become experts themselves due to racial and socio-economic inequalities. If such inequities between the demos and the experts persist, how can we ever truly reach an ideal version of what democracy is supposed to be?

As cliche as it might be, the phrase “knowledge is power” carries a kernel of truth. The voices of those with knowledge, a higher-education, or expertise are respected and heard. However, because of the way society and its capitalist values have established education opportunities as luxuries, accessible only to a select group of the population: typically wealthy, white people. We have built systemic barriers that inherently skew who has the ability to gain power or expertise which is why a society ruled solely by experts is not a true representative democracy. On the other hand, a government led solely by a demos consumed by ignorance has the potential to become chaos. It is clear, therefore, that the ideal principle of democracy requires a balance of power between mass opinion and expertise, but finding that balance is a challenging and imperfect process.

Emi dG Sarah R