Subscribe now

The political philosophy of democracy supposes that governments ought to be directed by the people.

Under normal circumstances, most people intuitively accept the idea that a property owner is the one who decides how to use a particular asset. For the Christian, this should be even more obvious, because divinely inspired scripture clearly commands us to observe property rights by abstaining from stealing (Exod 20:15, 1 Cor 6:10), negligent or malicious damaging of property (Exod 21:33–34, 22:5–6), and compensation for its use (Exod 22:14–15).

The theory of democracy supposes that property rights may be abridged when a great many people vote to do so. That is in contrast with the way that God ordered the nation of Israel, a covenant community formed by consent (Exod 24:3), and based on a system of familial and individual property rights. It is wrong for a king to exempt himself from his own laws (Deut 17:18–20), and even divinely appointed rulers are accountable under God’s immutable standards of justice (2 Sam 12:7–14). If King David was subject to God’s law, so too is the population at large, majority or not.

If the will of the people is contrary to the will of God, it is wrong to follow the will of the people. Throughout scripture, we see examples where the will of the people did violate God’s commandments: Aaron’s fashioning of a golden calf at the people’s urging (Exod 32), the demand by Israel’s elders to Samuel for a king (1 Sam 8), and Pilate’s capitulation to the people when he ordered the crucifixion of Christ (Mark 15:15).

Henry David Thoreau famously wrote, “Any man more right than his neighbor constitutes a majority of one already.” Simon Peter said it better when he said, “We must obey God rather than any human authority” (Acts 5:29).

This question is from Faith Seeking Freedom: Updated & Expanded, launching June 2026 in paperback, PDF, and Kindle. Subscribe to this Substack so you don’t miss updates, previews, and the launch announcement.

Subscribe now

Voting is sometimes regarded as a civil sacrament in American culture. Many activists across the political spectrum, opposed in nearly every policy area, will nonetheless agree to the secular “article of faith” that voting is inherently good, and that everyone should vote no matter what!

Christians should be wary of the quasi-sacred treatment received by ballots and elections in popular culture. In a way, politics is like two neighbors wrestling in the front yard over a loaded gun. The state is a violent enterprise (see Question 34), and voting is designed to allow a polity to decide which candidate to entrust control of that violent organization.

Some libertarians claim that casting a ballot somehow signals consent to the government under which the election is taking place. The abolitionist Lysander Spooner famously argued that under a government you never chose and can’t escape, voting is mainly an act of self-defense, not a genuine sign that you consent to be ruled.

It may be the case that a Christian prayerfully concludes that one candidate is more dangerous than the other to justice and peace. We often hear about voting for the lesser of two evils. The basic problem with that is that it leaves the voter supporting some kind of evil in the end. If a vote might injure a Christian’s conscience or public witness as a believer it is best for the believer to abstain from attempting to influence the outcome of that election through voting. Eternal things are simply more important than transient concerns of a particular time in history.

Subscribe now

Christians believe that God cares deeply about how we treat one another. For that reason, the way governments act, and the ways we allow ourselves to be governed, carry real moral weight. Modern political discourse often assumes as a given that democratic government is good. Before we can talk about democracy being good or bad, though, we should first identify what democracy is. The word democracy is often used as a synonym for majority rule. In this sense, there is no good reason for Christians or libertarians to be particularly democratic, especially when it comes to questions of right or wrong. A majority of people may indeed hold to a view that is abhorrent and advocates the violation of rights.

The word democracy comes from the Greek language and denotes, literally, rule by the people. It has often been used to describe something that is the opposite of autocratic authoritarianism, and implies a social structure where decision-making authority is more decentralized. Ludwig von Mises described this sort of democracy as referring to “the right of self-determination both of individuals and of nations.” However, Mises also warned that “Majorities are no less exposed to error and frustration than kings and dictators.”

While we are rightfully wary of appeals to simple majoritarianism, libertarian Christians view decentralized authority favorably. This is consistent with the injunction of Jesus to not behave like the rulers of this world (Matt 20:25), and instead practice servant leadership like the early church did in the book of Acts.