The Consent of the Governed:Dialogue as the Foundation of Stable Democracy

Abstract

This study explores the tension between elite knowledge and public sentiment as mutually opposing forces within democratic government. Technocratic elites may offer expertise and efficiency, yet their remoteness from lived experience may bring alienation and lack of legitimacy. On the other hand, unruly populism fueled by sentiment and grievance may undermine institutions and run the risk of descending into instability or despotism. Citing philosophers such as Plato, Burke, and Paine, among others, and recent instances such as Brexit, the riot on Capitol Hill, and China’s Zero-COVID strategy, this article contends that democracy cannot prosper by favoring either intellectual elites or emotive crowds exclusively. Instead, resilient democratic institutions would need to engage dialogue, empathy, and moral accountability such that expertise is held responsible and public feeling is channelled constructively. In positing models from Scandinavia and New Zealand, this study suggests that democracy survives less through ascendancy than through recurring dialogue that sustains credibility and reciprocal trust among rulers and ruled.