Online: https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2022.2157326

ABSTRACT

‘One person, one vote’ is wedded to the idea of democracy to such an extent that many would hesitate to refer to a system, which deviated from this, as a democracy. In this paper, I show why this assumption is hard to defend. I do so by pointing to the importance of baseline in justifying a system of ‘one person, one vote'. The investigation will show that the reasons underlying the most prominent views on democratic inclusion cannot justify ‘one person, one vote’ robustly. This ultimately means that democrats should be less confident in their judgment that 1P1V is a necessary part of democracy.