The phrase "tyranny of the majority" (or "tyranny of the masses") is used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule. It involves a scenario in which a majority places its own interests above those of a minority group, constituting active oppression comparable to that of a tyrant or despot. Potentially, a disliked ethnic, religious, political, or racial group may be deliberately penalized by the majority element acting through the democratic process. Hamilton writing to Jefferson from the Constitutional Convention argued the same. The scenarios in which tyranny perception occurs are very specific, involves a sort of distortion of democracy preconditions: \n* Centralisation excess: when the centralised power of a federation make a decision that should be local, breaking with the commitment to the subsidiarity principle. Typical solutions, in this condition, are and supermajority rules. \n* Abandonment of rationality: when, as Tocqueville remembered, a decision "which bases its claim to rule upon numbers, not upon rightness or excellence". The use of public consultation, technical consulting bodies, and other similar mechanisms help to improve rationality of decisions before to vote them. Judicial review (e.g. declaration of nullity of the decision) is the typical way after to vote. In both cases, in a context of nation, constitutional limits on the powers of a legislative body, and the introduction of a Bill of Rights have been used to counter the problem. A separation of powers (legislative and executive majority actions subject to review by the judiciary) may also be implemented to prevent the problem from happening internally in a government.

Read full article on Wikipedia · CC-BY-SA