Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Conference
Location
About APSA
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Many Indigenous nations in the settler state of Canada have two governments: elective band councils and a customary leadership that is sometimes unelected. When these groups struggle for authority, outsiders often side with the band councils, assuming that non-electoral governments are undemocratic. We argue that this assumption reflects an unwarranted electoral bias. Some non-electoral Indigenous governments gain substantial democratic legitimacy by providing a framework for self-determination that (unlike band councils) cannot be reasonably rejected as a colonial imposition; by providing non-electoral mechanisms encouraging responsiveness that may function better than electoral; and by performing superior systemic deliberation than an alternative electoral system. In some contexts, these benefits may be sufficiently weighty to make customary governance more democratically legitimacy than elective.