The Demographic Objection and the Limits of Competence

Abstract

Epistocrats argue that political power should be distributed according to competence. Under universal suffrage the electorate at any given election will be comprised of both competent and incompetent voters due to varying degrees of knowledge and rationality within the polity. Jason Brennan argues that by excluding politically ignorant citizens from voting, the remaining electorate will be more competent in electing governments which will produce political outcomes that serve the nation better than democracy does. However, being politically well-informed is likely to correspond with being well-educated which in turn is likely to correspond with being privileged. Since access to education is not equally distributed in society, limiting voting rights on this basis may effectively exclude groups of already marginalized citizens, whose knowledge might be invaluable to address current issues of justice. Furthermore, while education has its epistemic benefits, it is not clear that it will all-things-considered lead one to make better and less biased political decisions. I will argue that the losses of disenfranchising uneducated demographic groups are greater than its epistemic benefits.