Stability in Liberal Epistocracies

References

• Achen, C., and L. M. Bartels. 2017. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arlen, G., and E. Rossi. 2022. “Is This What Democracy Looks Like.” Inquiry 65 (1): 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arneson, R. J. 2003. “Defending the Purely Instrumental Account of Democratic Legitimacy.” The Journal of Political Philosophy 11 (1): 122–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arneson, R. J. 2009. “The Supposed Right to a Democratic Say.” In Contemporary Debates in Political Philosophy, edited by T. Christiano and J. Christman, 197–212. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Bagg, S. 2018. “The Power of the Multitude: Answering Epistemic Challenges to Democracy.” The American Political Science Review 112 (4): 891–904. doi:10.1017/S0003055418000527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bai, T. 2020. Against Political Equality: The Confucian Case. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, D. A. 2015. The China Model. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, D. A., and W. Pei. 2020. Just Hierarchies: Why Social Hierarchies Matter in China and the Rest of the World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan, J. 2007. “Modesty Without Illusion.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (1): 111–128. doi:10.1111/j.1933-1592.2007.00062.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, J. 2011. The Ethics of Voting. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan, J. 2016. Against Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan, J. 2018. “Does the Demographic Objection to Epistocracy Succeed?” Res Publica 24 (1): 53–71. doi:10.1007/s11158-017-9385-y.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan, J. 2019. “Democracy as Uniformed Non-Consent.” Journal of Applied Philosophy 36 (2): 205–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, J. 2022. “Giving Epistocracy a Fair Hearing.” Inquiry 65 (1): 35–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplan, B. 2007. The Myth of the Rational Voter. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ceva, E., and V. Ottonelli. 2021. “Second-Personal Authority and the Practice of Democracy.” Constellations. Online First.
   Google Scholar
• Cozzaglio, I. 2020. “Political Realism, Legitimacy, and a Place for External Critique.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 47 (10): 1213–1236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Estlund, D. 2003. “Why Not Epistocracy.” In Desire, Identity and Existence: Essays in Honor of T. M. Penner, edited by N. Reshotko, 53–69. Kelowna, BC: Academic Printing & Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Estlund, D. 2008. Democratic Authority. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, J. 2017. “The Problem of Epistocratic Identification and the (Possibly) Dysfunctional Division of Epistemic Labor.” Critical Review 29 (3): 293–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gastil, J., and E. O. Wright. 2019. Legislature by Lot. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Gerbaudo, P. 2017. The Mask and the Flag: Populism, Citizenism and Global Protest. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gerschewski, J. 2013. “The Three Pillars of Stability: Legitimation, Repression, and Co-Optation in Autocratic Regimes.” Democratization 20 (1): 13–38. doi:10.1080/13510347.2013.738860.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giavazzi, M. 2020. “Rule of the Knowers. The Epistocratic Challenge to Democracy.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Warwick.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbons, A. 2021. “Political Disagreement and Minimal Epistocracy.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 19 (2): 192–201.
   Google Scholar
• Goodin, R. E., and K. Spiekermann. 2018. An Epistemic Theory of Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, A. R. 2017. “Legitimacy Without Liberalism: A Defense of Max Weber’s Standard of Political Legitimacy.” Analyse & Kritik 39 (2): 295–324. doi:10.1515/auk-2017-0017.
   Google Scholar
• Gunn, P. 2019. “Against Epistocracy.” Critical Review 31 (1): 26–82. doi:10.1080/08913811.2019.1609842.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halikiopoulou, D. 2018. “A Right-Wing Populist Momentum? A Review of 2017 Elections Across Europe.” Journal of Common Market Studies 56: 63–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hédoin, C. 2021. “The ‘Epistemic Critique’ of Epistocracy and Its Inadequacy.” Social Epistemology 35: 502–514.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, J. 2006. “John Gray and the Political Theory of Modus Vivendi.” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 9 (2): 155–169. doi:10.1080/13698230600654993.
   Google Scholar
• Ingham, S. 2012. “Disagreement and Epistemic Arguments for Democracy.” Politics, Philosophy and Economics 12 (2): 136–155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeffrey, A. 2018. “Limited Epistocracy and Political Inclusion.” Episteme 15 (4): 412–432. doi:10.1017/epi.2017.8.
   Google Scholar
• Landa, D., and R. Pevnick. 2020. “Representative Democracy as Defensible Epistocracy.” The American Political Science Review 14 (1): 1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landemore, H. 2013. Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Landemore, H. 2020. Open Democracy: Reinventing Popular Rule for the Twenty-First Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lepoute, M. 2021. Democratic Speech in Divided Times. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• López-Guerra, C. 2014. Democracy and Disenfranchisement. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Manor, A. 2022. “Polycentric Limited Epistocracy: Political Expertise and the Wiki-Model.” Episteme 19 (1): 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Moraro, P. 2018. “Against Epistocracy.” Social Theory and Practice 44 (2): 199–216. doi:10.5840/soctheorpract20185835.
   Google Scholar
• Mulligan, T. 2018. “Plural Voting for the Twenty-First Century.” The Philosophical Quarterly 68: 286–306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawls, J. 2005. Political Liberalism. Expanded Edition. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reiss, J. 2019. “Expertise, Agreement, and the Nature of Social Scientific Facts Or: Against Epistocracy.” Social Epistemology 33 (2): 183–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sankaran, K. 2020. “What’s New in the New Ideology Critique?” Philosophical Studies 177 (5): 1441–1462. doi:10.1007/s11098-019-01261-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somin, I. 2013. Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government is Smarter. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thrasher, J., and K. Vallier. 2015. “The Fragility of Consensus: Public Reason, Diversity, and Stability.” European Journal of Philosophy 23 (4): 933–954.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thrasher, J., and K. Vallier. 2018. “Political Stability in the Open Society.” American Journal of Political Science 62 (2): 398–399. doi:10.1111/ajps.12333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valentini, L. 2013. “Justice, Disagreement and Democracy.” British Journal of Political Science 43 (1): 177–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, M. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wendt, F. 2016. Compromise, Peace and Public Justification: Political Morality Beyond Justice. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar