IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v69y1975i04p1270-1294_24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Limits of Consensual Decision

Author

Listed:
  • Rae, Douglas W.

Abstract

This essay criticizes the ideal of consensual decision as it appears in liberal political theory. A historical survey begins with Locke's view of consent, its criticism and extension by 19th century figures such as Godwin, Calhoun, and Mill, its reappearance in the guise of economic efficiency within the works of Wicksell or Buchanan and Tullock and as moral autonomy in Wolff's Defense of Anarchy. The paper offers a structural account of political decision making in which vulnerability to the authority of others seems inescapable and in which neither unanimity nor a universal right of consent is possible. On this telling, consensual decision is logically unattainable and misdirects constitutional theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Rae, Douglas W., 1975. "The Limits of Consensual Decision," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 69(4), pages 1270-1294, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:69:y:1975:i:04:p:1270-1294_24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400245061/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kenneth Koford, 1982. "Optimal voting rules under uncertainty," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 149-165, January.
    2. Richard Cebula & Milton Kafoglis, 1987. "In search of optimum ‘relative unanimity’: Reply," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 289-290, August.
    3. Michael Brooks, 1987. "In search of optimum ‘relative unanimity’: A comment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 283-288, August.
    4. Saam, Nicole J. & Sumpter, David, 2008. "EU institutional reforms: How do member states reach a decision," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 71-86.
    5. Linda McCarthy, 2009. "Off the Mark?," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 23(3), pages 211-228, August.
    6. A. J. McGann, 2004. "The Tyranny of the Supermajority," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 53-77, January.
    7. Richard Cebula & Milton Kafoglis, 1983. "In search of optimum ‘relative unanimity’," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 195-201, January.
    8. Josep M. Colomer, 1999. "On the Geometry of Unanimity Rule," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(4), pages 543-553, October.
    9. Hélène Landemore & Scott E. Page, 2015. "Deliberation and disagreement," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 14(3), pages 229-254, August.
    10. Dalibor Roháč, 2008. "The unanimity rule and religious fractionalisation in the Polish-Lithuanian Republic," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 111-128, June.
    11. Karol Sołltan, 1988. "Democracy, dictatorship and decision costs," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 155-173, May.
    12. Jeroen Van Der Heijden, 2010. "A short history of studying incremental institutional change: Does Explaining Institutional Change provide any new explanations?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 230-243, June.
    13. Peter Leeson, 2009. "The calculus of piratical consent: the myth of the myth of social contract," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 443-459, June.
    14. Phillip W. Magness & Art Carden & Vincent Geloso, 2019. "James M. Buchanan and the Political Economy of Desegregation," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(3), pages 715-741, January.
    15. John Meadowcroft, 2014. "Exchange, unanimity and consent: a defence of the public choice account of power," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 85-100, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:69:y:1975:i:04:p:1270-1294_24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.