3 ms·
Ofc, but given that there’s no way whatsoever to withdraw consent, it’s meaningless. It’s policing by democracy. That’s fine, and I know no better way, but it’
by skrebbel 3y ago
Ofc, but given that there’s no way whatsoever to withdraw consent, it’s meaningless.
It’s policing by democracy. That’s fine, and I know no better way, but it’s not consent. It’s just majority rule.
I think “Policing by majority approval” would be a better term. That’s also Peel’s main point I think: to not police in name of some sole ruler or
small elite but in name of, and in service of, everybody.
I wonder whether in the 19th century “consent” meant something different.
- Doxin 3y agoEh fair enough, but that's debating definitions which is not usually all that interesting. Seems like word choice aside we agree.
- hgsgm 3y agoWhen you have millions of people, you need to form abstractions over large groups. The Majority of the Public is a million times better than The Whim of the King.
- AnimalMuppet 3y agoBut it needs to be more than just "majority". I'm not sure Peelian policing can work if 40% of the society doesn't approve of them. 1%? Sure, that will probably work. 10%? Not sure. Somewhere well before 50%, it breaks down.