Herrenvolk democracy is a nominally democratic form of government in which only a specific ethnic group has voting rights and the right to run for office, while other groups are disenfranchised.[1] Herrenvolk democracy is a subtype of ethnocracy, which refers to any form of government where one ethnic group dominates the state, with or without elections. Elections were/are generally free, but voting suffrage was restricted based on race, with governance that reflected the interests of the politically dominant racial group. The German term Herrenvolk, meaning "master race", was used in nineteenth century discourse that justified German colonialism with the supposed racial superiority of Europeans.[2]
This form of government is typically employed by an ethnic group or groups to maintain control and power within the system. It is often accompanied with a pretense of egalitarianism. As people of the dominant ethnic group gain freedom and liberty and egalitarian principles are advanced, other ethnic groups are repressed and prevented from being involved in the government.
The term was first used in 1967 by Pierre van den Berghe in his book Race and Racism.[3]
In his 1991 book The Wages of Whiteness, historian David R. Roediger reinterprets this form of government in the context of 19th-century United States, arguing that the term "Herrenvolk republicanism" more accurately describes racial politics at this time. The basis of Herrenvolk republicanism went beyond the marginalization of black people in favor of a republican government serving the "master race"; it contended that "blackness" was synonymous with dependency and servility and was, therefore, antithetical to republican independence and white freedom. Consequently, the dependent white worker at this time used his whiteness to differentiate himself from and elevate himself over the dependent black worker or enslaved person. According to this ideology, black people were not merely "non-citizens"; they were "anti-citizens" who inherently opposed the ideals of a republican government.[4]
This principle can be seen in the development of both the United States—especially the Southern states—and South Africa in the 19th and 20th centuries.[5] In these historical scenarios, even as legislation moved toward universal male suffrage and later toward universal suffrage for white people, it also further entrenched restrictions on political participation by black people and upheld their disenfranchisement.[6] Southern Rhodesia and later Rhodesia restricted voting rights by qualifications like income and literacy, thus effectively restricting the franchise to the white population.[7]
In Liberia voting was restricted to descendants of Americo-Liberians until 1946.[8] [9] Liberian nationality law is not alone:
Some scholars and commentators, including Ilan Pappé, Baruch Kimmerling, and Meron Benvenisti, have characterized Israel as a Herrenvolk democracy due to Israel's de facto control of the occupied territories whose native inhabitants may not vote in Israeli elections.[10] [11] [12] [13]