Confucian meritocratic rule has been recently advocated on the basis of the economic performance of Western democracies and the political ignorance of their average voters. These arguments are grounded in the analyses of real phenomena, but they are insufficient to establish the greater effectiveness of political meritocracy over democracy. This does not mean that the principle of political meritocracy (a principle of government that aims to strengthen the role of the competent and the morally good ones) is irrelevant to the solution of some of the troubles affecting contemporary democracies. On the contrary, such a principle could play a significant role in designing auxiliary institutional mechanisms to strengthen the quality of political leadership in a democracy.
BaiTongdong. 2008. “A Mencian Version of Limited Democracy.” Res Publica14: 19−34.
2.
BaiTongdong. 2013. “A Confucian Version of Hybrid Regime: How Does it Work, and Why is it Superior?” In The East Asian Challenge for Democracy: Political Meritocracy in Comparative Perspective, edited by BellDaniel A.LiChenyang, 55−87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
BellDaniel A.2006. Beyond Liberal Democracy: Political Thinking for an East Asian Context. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
4.
BellDaniel A.2015. The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
5.
BellowsThomas. 2009. “Meritocracy and the Singaporean Political System.”Asian Journal of Political Science17, no. 1: 24–44.
6.
BrennanJason. 2011a. The Ethics of Voting. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
7.
BrennanJason. 2011b. “The Right to a Competent Electorate.” Philosophical Quarterly61, no. 245: 700−724.
8.
BrennanJason. 2014. “Should We Force the Drunk to Drive?” In Compulsory Voting: For and Against, edited by JasonBrennanLisaHill, 83–108. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
BrennaJason. 2016. Against Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
10.
CaplanBryan. 2007. The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
11.
ChanJoseph. 2007. “Democracy and Meritocracy: Toward a Confucian Perspective.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy34: 179−93.
12.
ChanJoseph. 2013. “Political Meritocracy and Meritorious Rule: A Confucian Perspective.” In The East Asian Challenge for Democracy: Political Meritocracy in Comparative Perspective, edited by DanielBellChenyangLi, 31−54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
ChanJoseph. 2014. Confucian Perfectionism: A Political Philosophy for Modern Times. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
14.
ChristianoThomas. 2017. “Review of Jason Brennan’s Against Democracy.” Notre Dame Philosophical Review. Accessed October 12, 2019. https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/against-democracy/.
15.
DownAnthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row Publisher.
16.
DryzekJohn, et al.2019. “The Crisis of Democracy and the Science of Deliberation.” Science363, no. 6432: 1144−146.
FanRuiping. 2013. “Confucian Meritocracy for Contemporary China.” In The East Asian Challenge for Democracy: Political Meritocracy in Comparative Perspective, edited by BellDanielLiChenyang, 87−115. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
KupchanCharles. 2012. “The Democratic Malaise: Globalization and the Threat to the West.” Foreign Affairs91, no. 1: 62–67.
23.
LeeKuan Yew. 1998. “Speech in Parliament on the White Paper on Ministerial Salaries.” In Lee Kuan Yew: The Man and His Ideas, edited by KwangHan FookWarrenFernandezSumikoTan, 331−42. Singapore: Times Editions.
24.
LiChenyang. 2009. “Where Does Confucian Virtuous Leadership Stand?” Philosophy East & West59, no. 4: 531−36.
25.
LiChenyang. 2012. “Equality and Inequality in Confucianism.” Dao11: 295−313.
26.
Lopéz-GuerraClaudio. 2011. “The Enfranchisement Lottery.” Politics, Philosophy, and Economics10: 211–33.
27.
MahizhnanArun. 2016. “Rashomon Effect: Introduction.” In Battle for Hearts and Minds: New Media and Elections in Singapore, edited by TanTarn HowMahizhnanArunAngPeng Hwa, xv−xxxii. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.
28.
ManinBernard. 1997. The Principle of Representative Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29.
MansbridgeJane, et al.2012. “A Systemic Approach to Deliberative Democracy.” in Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Systems at the Large Scale, edited by MansbridgeJaneParkinsonJohn, 1−26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
MargettsHelen. 2019. “Rethinking Democracy with Social Media.” The Political Quarterly90, no. 1: 107−123.
31.
MulliganThomas. 2018. “Plural Voting for the Twenty-first Century.” Philosophical Quarterly no. 68: 286–306.
PincioneGuidoTesónFerdinando. 2006. Rational Choice and Democratic Deliberation: A Theory of Discourse Failure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
PoochaeronOra–ornBrillantesAlex. 2013. “Meritocracy in Asia Pacific: Status, Issues, and Challenges.” Review of Public Personnel Administration33, no. 2: 140–63.
35.
QingJian. 2012. A Confucian Constitutional Order: How China’s Ancient Pass Can Shape Its Political Future. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
36.
QuahJon. 2010. “Public Administration Singapore Style.” In Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management, edited by QuahJon, 19. Bingley: Emerald Group.
37.
RocesMina. 2008. “Women, Citizenship and the Politics of Dress in Twentieth-Century Philippines.” In Gender Politics in Asia: Women Manoeuvring Within Dominant Gender Orders, edited by BurghoornWilIwanagaKazukiMilwertsCeciliaWangQi, 11–42. Copenhagen: NIAS Press.
38.
RosenblumNancy. 2008. On the Side of the Angels. An Appreciation of Parties and Partisanship. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
39.
SchattschneiderElmer. 1942. Party Government: American Government in Action. New York: Rinehart & Company.
40.
ShapiroIanRosenbluthFrances McCall. 2018. Responsible Parties: Saving Democracy from Itself. New Haven: Yale University Press.
41.
SominIlya. 2013. Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government is Smarter. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
42.
TarloEmma. 1996. Clothing Matters: Dress and Identity in India. London: Hurst & Company.
43.
UnverAkin. 2017. “Digital Challenges to Democracy” Politics of Automation, Attention, and Engagement.” Journal of International Affairs71, no. 1: 127−46.
44.
WhiteJonathanYpiLea. 2016. The Meaning of Partisanship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45.
WongBenjamin. 2013. “Political Meritocracy in Singapore: Lessons from the PAP Government.” In The East Asian Challenge for Democracy: Political Meritocracy in Comparative Perspective, edited by BellDanielLiChenyang, 288−313. New York: Cambridge University Press.
