Majorities, Supermajorities, and Unanimity

a Brief Western History

Abstract

This article analyses three voting rules used in the West: majority rule, supermajority rules, and unanimity rule. Considering the current crisis of constitutional representative democracy—a crisis that has affected Chile—this article identifies some of the traits of these voting rules to produce information that contributes to eventual institutional reforms. This article examines majority rule, supermajority rules, and unanimity rule in Ancient Greece, the Roman Republic, the Latin Catholic Church, and the Italian city-states. Further, this article examines the reflections of some Enlightenment philosophers on these rules. This article has four conclusions. First, unanimity rule may coerce eventual dissenters. Second, majority rule and supermajority rules are flexible since they consider possible intra-group disagreements. Third, majority rule symbolises equality of status among group members. Lastly, supermajority rules protect a status quo considered valuable, incentivise deliberation by slowing down decision making, and symbolise the idea that decisions supported by broad agreements are likely right.