Theorizing Anti-Oligarchic Politics: Institutions, Principles, and Practices

Oligarchic tendencies pose a threat to contemporary politics, especially in democracies. While there is disagreement about what an ‘oligarchy’ exactly is, most scholars who address this issue refer to the same empirical fact, namely the translation of socio-economic inequalities into political power (e.g. McCormick 2011; Winters 2011; Vergara 2020). If concentrations of power in the hands of a (small) minority and the systemic character of that power are to be taken as necessary conditions of an oligarchy (Winters 2011, 3–4), then the much-studied unequal responsiveness shows that in most contemporary democracies—not just majoritarian and market-liberal ones— these necessary conditions are met. Such oligarchic tendencies not only pose a challenge to the future of democracy. They also pose challenges to many of the foundational assumptions of modern political theory, such as political equality and popular sovereignty, and force us to reconsider the divide between rulers and ruled as one of the circumstances that shapes politics.

In response to these challenges, we have seen a revival of anti-oligarchic theorizing. The tradition of Plebeian thought has been burgeoning in various forms, reaching from liberal (Green 2016; Arlen 2019; 2023) via republican (McCormick 2011; Vergara 2020; Thompson 2019) to radical democratic perspectives (Rancière 1999; Breaugh 2013; Kalyvas 2019; Mulvad and Stahl 2019). From the perspective of democratic institutional innovation, Vergara ( 2021), Arlen and Rossi (2021) and Prinz and Westphal (2024) have sought to update the institution of the tribunate. In government and public administration, Samuel Bagg (Bagg 2024) has proposed the defence against state capture and the dispersal of power as key elements for keeping oligarchic threats at bay. And with a strong footing in the history of ideas, Martin Breaugh proposes to understand the plebeian experience as one of interruption, destabilizing the oligarchic hegemony (Breaugh 2013; 2019).

Building on this renewed interest, our workshop aims to bring together scholars from all strands of anti-oligarchic thought, who might differ in their conceptual frameworks and methodological approaches, but share the commitment to further explore what anti-oligarchic politics can mean. Our goal is to facilitate constructive and critical discussions across different traditions, be they liberal, republican or radical democratic, and unearth new resources for anti-oligarchic thought. In particular, we hope to identify and systemize institutions, principles and practices that aim to counter oligarchic tendencies in modern democracies.

Contributions could contain but are not limited to discussions of:

• Forgotten experiments with anti-oligarchic institutions or anti-oligarchic utopian proposals;

• How we should understand the role of plebeian principles and tasks of plebeian institutions;

• Plebeian practices and counter-institutions in contemporary democracies;

• Differences and possible tensions between different forms and theories of plebeianism;

• New proposals for anti-oligarchic institutions and procedures;

• The role of anti-oligarchic political theory and anti-oligarchic practices for the future of democratic theory and (liberal) democracies.