Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 10.djvu/761

 POPULAR INITIATIVE 745

There was too much changing of rules too much promiscuous and ill-advised law-making. Say the authors :

We see that half a century of practical experience with the initiative and referendum has led, not to its extension, but to an ever stricter limitation of its application. The attempt to secure the participation of every member in the management of his society was found to lead to instability in legislation, dangerous unsoundness of finance, and general weakness of administration. (Vol. I, p. 26.)

Yet these members were acting only upon questions connected with their organizations, about which they may be presumed to have known a good deal. Is it not reasonable to inquire what room there is to expect the multitude, either in England or America, to act more coherently or intelligently on complicated public questions that do not so nearly concern it. As to the experience cited there is no guesswork :

If, therefore, democracy means that " everything which concerns all should be decided by all," and that each citizen should enjoy an equal share in the government, trade-union history indicates clearly its inevitable result. Government by such contrivances [mass-meeting, referendum, initiative] leads straight either to inefficiency and disintegration, or to the uncontrolled domina- tion of a personal dictator or an expert bureaucracy. Dimly and almost unconsciously this conclusion has after a whole century of experiment forced itself upon the most advanced trades. The old theory of democracy is still an article of faith, and constantly comes to the front when any organization has to be formed for brand-new purposes. The use of the initiative and referendum has been tacitly given up in all complicated issues.

There is much in these conclusions for every radical advocate of direct popular control :

In the democratic state, as in the trade union, the eventful judgment of

the people is pronounced, not upon projects, but upon results All that

we have said as to the logical futility of the referendum, and as to the neces- sity of the representative, therefore, applies even more strongly to democratic states than to trades unions. For what is the lesson to be learned from trade- union history? The referendum, introduced for the express purpose of secur- ing popular consent, has in almost all cases failed to accomplish its object. The failure is due, as the reader will have observed, to the constant inability of the ordinary man to estimate what will be the effect of a particular proposal. What democracy requires is assent to results; what the referendum gives is assent to projects. No trade union has, for instance, desired bankruptcy, but many trade unions have persistently voted for scales of contributions and benefits which have inevitably resulted in bankruptcy. If this is the case in