The Selection of Public Officials in Democracies

Key Insight

In the United States, the most outstanding individuals are rarely chosen to direct public affairs, a phenomenon observed as democracy expanded. Despite the European belief that universal suffrage elevates worthy leaders who genuinely desire the public good, American experience suggests otherwise. Upon arrival, it was surprising to find abundant talent among the governed but scarcity in government, indicating a singular shrinkage in the stature of American statesmen over half a century.

Several factors contribute to this. Limits to public enlightenment exist because education requires time and resources, freeing people from material needs—a state incompatible with being 'the people.' While most citizens sincerely desire good for their country, especially the lower classes who are less prone to personal interest, they often lack the 'art of judging the means' to achieve it, making them susceptible to charlatans.

Furthermore, democratic institutions foster envy, a sentiment continually awakened but never fully satisfied by the pursuit of equality. Any superiority becomes an 'obstacle' to popular desires. This democratic, not merely French, instinct leads the people to exclude the upper classes from power and talented individuals to avoid politics, unwilling to compromise themselves, as exemplified by Chancellor Kent's 1830 observation that 'fittest men would probably have too much reservedness of manners and severity of morals to secure an election resting on universal suffrage.'