Contrarily The Majority Does Not Rule
A Contingent Minority of Whiteness Does Not Constitute A Majoritarian Democracy
There is a dilemma here that warrants some examination and we should deliberatively dissect it to get to the crux of this constitutional crisis that juxtaposes our humanity in an unfavorably deceptive light. The president consistently lambastes the media and those embittered by his presence in the oval office as losers, as if, the existential game being played was actually a fair one.
The discordance that we have felt and observed is approaching a crescendo with an incessant “Make America Great Again” refrain. Many are just singing along to a lulling melody of sorts without understanding what the verses are or what they mean. It’s the kind of cajolery that sophists use to create a state of intellectual slumber.
Either take what is given or leave it
This sophistry has enabled and proffered a sclerotic institutional governance as a Hobson’s Choice (not Hobbes) from the start and nothing good will ever come from what is seemingly neofascism taking shape under the cover of a faux or scandalous democracy. It's an extreme form of conservatism — nativistic, authoritarian, just-world theorizing — espousing politically incorrect resentment by racializing minority groups as nefariously attempting to usurp the defaulted pre-established but unearned norms of white privilege and supremacy within the elite.
To the contrary a majority of self-serving whites do not represent or make a majoritarian democracy. Within the framework of the minority model those interests are sure to fail in the political process if it is at odds with the majority under such a system. However, there are a limited set of fundamental rights that protects those minorities from favorable bias and from certain violations. This judicial system has not always been consistent either depending on who that minority representation is it has been overly consistent when the minority model consists of white Americans in plurality of votes that are at odds with the absolute majority.
The minority model implies that cases like Plessy v. Ferguson18 were good-faith if wrongheaded efforts to balance majority rule and minority rights.19 But if African Americans were a majority, then there was no tension between majority rule and constitutional rights; both pointed towards invalidation of the statute. A close reading shows that in Plessy and other important decisions, 20 the Court knew it was reviewing laws passed by a minority to oppress the majority. Therefore, the fact that African Americans were a majority shows that the modem counter-majoritarian difficulty was preceded by a majoritarian difficulty.
It surely doesn’t feel like a live constitution amendable to the majority in modernizing democracy, it is the zombie republican house and republican senate — hauntingly on behalf of the dead framers — along with its liberal sympathizers that are the actual minority, scaring the country away from moving democracy forward in any progressive way.
Majoritarian with words and not actions
The scandal should be glaringly obvious by now. A minority running the house and the senate (legislative), the Supreme Court (judicial), and the White House (executive) is acting in defiance of the majority.
This fraud was scripted into a flawed constitution that a self-effacing republic at the time never questioned it. The white patriarchy at the time held themselves as a majority that clearly would have been in the minority had they followed majoritarian principles, but over time this tyrannical minority implanted itself like a virus to ensure its survival.
That infectious strain is seen in how the Supreme Court is democratically flawed today allowing unelected justices to serve for a lifetime no matter how lopsided and consequential their political position may be in vitiating democratic principles. The institutional callousness that would follow would inspire lawful gerrymandering and an electoral college that would dismiss the popular vote and elect an unpopular president. This would ensure that certain votes in particular will always elevate the status of white males while diminishing the votes of everyone else, essentially making those votes count more.
This is a minority that insists on oppressing the majority. What obfuscates this matter is the misnomer that racialized groups and their interests are generalized presumptively as in the minority when in fact they are pluralistically in the majority of truly held democratic American values and beliefs.
The courts incorrectly uses the minority model in their judiciary review and distorts the realities of majoritarianism. This is seen as contributing to the Counter-Majoritarian Dilemma. According to the Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper №07–03 and Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, the corruptive distortion was in effect earlier on.
In the darkest days of Jim Crow, African Americans were a minority nationally, but were a majority in the states where their population was most highly concentrated. In 1880, for example, African Americans were an absolute majority in Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina; and were over 40% of the population in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Virginia, making African Americans the largest single voting bloc in those states.9 Allied with Republican [today’s Democrat] whites, African Americans outnumbered conservatives and earned majority control of the electoral system in many states.10 Through violence, fraud, and what under currrent understandings of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were clearly unconstitutional acts engaged in, not by a white majority, but by a conservative minority, the African American majority was not merely subject to discrimination and segregation, but, far more importantly, was denied its rightful democratic authority.11
You don’t have to be a political scholar nor a constitutional scholar to see that the Tyranny of this Minority has effectively disenfranchised African Americans setting a precedent for other racialized, gendered and subgroup minorities. This disenfranchisement is real as it has also spread to a subgroup of whites who otherwise consider the system rigged and abstain from voting. They shroud their belief in smart alecky taunts knowing full well in the end that regardless their racial class is privileged and would be protected. This, even when it is like voting against their very own interests and giving credence to a rogue minority that has usurped majority power in Congress and in the White House.
The divide and conquer strategy has worked for far too long in their undemocratic favor. I am not at all impressed, nor will I be convinced of its faux majoritarianism in power which evinces an aggressive sham still taking place to this day.
In the wake of Brown v. Board of Education,49 decided a year later, the problem Professor Bischoff identified became the “central·· obsession of modern constitutional scholarship.”50 Professor Alexander Bickel, author of the term “counter-majoritarian difficulty,” wrote “that the policy-making power of representative institutions, born of the electoral process, is the distinguishing characteristic of the system.”51 “The root difficulty,” wrote Bickel, “is that judicial review is a counter-majoritarian force in our system. . . . [I]t thwarts the will of the representatives of the actual people here and now; it exercises control, not on behalf of the prevailing majority, but against it.”52
Fundamental to the discussion is the basis of humanness but the complexities hidden in plain view needs untangling for this to motivate the dynamics of that truth.
Chin, Gabriel Jackson and Wagner, Randy, The Tyranny of the Minority: Jim Crow and the Counter-Majoritarian Difficulty (April 14, 2011). Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, Vol. 43, p. 65, 2008; Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper №07–03. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=963036