Stephen C Angle - In defence of hierarchy
The modern West has
placed a high premium on the value of equality. Equal rights are enshrined in
law while old hierarchies of nobility and social class have been challenged, if
not completely dismantled. Few would doubt that global society is all the better
for these changes. But hierarchies have not disappeared. Society is still
stratified according to wealth and status in myriad ways.
On the other hand, the
idea of a purely egalitarian world in which there are no hierarchies at all
would appear to be both unrealistic and unattractive. Nobody, on reflection,
would want to eliminate all hierarchies, for we all benefit from the
recognition that some people are more qualified than others to perform certain
roles in society. We prefer to be treated by senior surgeons not medical
students, get financial advice from professionals not interns. Good and
permissible hierarchies are everywhere around us.
Yet hierarchy is an
unfashionable thing to defend or to praise. British government ministers
denounce experts as out of tune with popular feeling; both Donald Trump and
Bernie Sanders built platforms on attacking Washington elites; economists are
blamed for not predicting the 2008 crash; and even the best established
practice of medical experts, such as childhood vaccinations, are treated with
resistance and disbelief. We live in a time when no distinction is drawn
between justified and useful hierarchies on the one hand, and self-interested,
exploitative elites on the other.
As a group, we believe
that clearer thinking about hierarchy and equality is important in business,
politics and public life. We should lift the taboo on discussing what makes for
a good hierarchy. To the extent that hierarchies are inevitable, it is
important to create good ones and avoid those that are pernicious. It is also
important to identify the ways in which useful and good hierarchies support and
foster good forms of equality. When we talk about hierarchies here, we mean
those distinctions and rankings that bring with them clear power differentials.
We are a diverse group
of scholars and thinkers who take substantively different views on many
political and ethical issues. Recently, we engaged in an intensive discussion
of these issues under the aegis of the Berggruen Philosophy and Culture Center
in Los Angeles, and we found ourselves agreeing on this: much can be said in
defence of some kinds of hierarchy. The ideas we present here are at the very
least worthy of more widespread and serious attention. All of this takes on a
new urgency given the turn in world politics towards a populism that often
attacks establishment hierarchies while paradoxically giving authoritarian
power to individuals claiming to speak for ‘the people’.
What then, should be
said in praise of hierarchy? First, bureaucratic
hierarchies can serve democracy. Bureaucracy is even less popular these days
than hierarchy. Yet bureaucratic hierarchies can instantiate crucial democratic
values, such as the rule of law and equal treatment.
There are at least
three ways in which usually hierarchical constitutional institutions can
enhance democracy: by protecting minority rights, and thereby ensuring that the
basic interests of minorities are not lightly discounted by self-interested or
prejudiced majorities; by curbing the power of majority or minority factions to
pass legislation favouring themselves at the expense of the public good; and by
increasing the epistemic resources that are brought to bear on decision-making,
making law and policy more reflective of high-quality deliberation. Hence
democracies can embrace hierarchy because hierarchy can enhance democracy
itself.
Yet in recent decades,
these civic hierarchies have been dismantled and often replaced
with decentralised, competitive markets, all in the name of efficiency.
This makes sense only if efficiency and effectiveness (usually assumed to be
measured in economic terms) are considered the overriding priorities. But if we
make that assumption, we find ourselves giving less weight to values such as
the rule of law, democratic legitimacy or social equality. Hence, we might
sometimes prefer the democratically accountable hierarchies that preserve those
values even over optimal efficiency.
Read more:
https://aeon.co/essays/hierarchies-have-a-place-even-in-societies-built-on-equality
