A long time ago I was asked the difference between a plebiscite and a referendum, but I declined to put my answer in print, firstly because it was too hard to answer in a way that people, including myself, would understand, and secondly because it was a dry subject.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The question has again been put to me. I will try to answer it this time, because it seems to have been upgraded to important in some people’s eyes.
In brief, the way I understand it, a plebiscite is a question to gauge the will of the people, but a referendum asks the people to vote on a piece of legislation that has been brought forward for the constitution.
Ambrose Bierce in his Devil’s Dictionary of 1881 said a plebiscite was a popular vote to ascertain the will of the sovereign.
This word, in print, goes back to 1553. In 1658 it was said to represent law made by the common people. Much later, a pleb came to represent one of the common people.
The plebe was adopted by the United States as a member of the lower class at a military or naval academy.
But in 1884 Herbert Spencer in Man Versus State asked: “If people by a plebiscite elect a man despot over them, do they remain free because the despotism was of their own making?”
Don’t expect me to answer. I’m just quoting someone else.
As for referendum, this goes back only to the 19th century. But the meaning is the voters receive a question and they are expected to vote on whether they want this question enacted in law.
The explanation on this word and associated words goes on in my big dictionary for several pages.
In 1895 in England they had a referendum on the practice of referee baiting.
Plenty of examples exist where a parliament, or even a jury, can’t make up its mind. The phrase seems to derive from the sense of “hung” to mean caught, suspended or delayed (“I got hung up at the office”).
That’s a good phrase that covers all eventualities when you were where you shouldn’t have been.
A hung parliament is one in which no party has an absolute majority of seats.
This term was first used in Britain in 1974, but hang or hung has been used to indicate a situation that’s indecisive since at least the 14th century, when it was became linked to the idea of suspense.
The phrase hung jury - one that cannot agree - has been used in the USA at least since late in the 19th century.
As for hung jury, I suppose it’s a bit better than some decisions that were reached in days of old, such as “if she floats, she’s a witch” or a defendant walking nine paces with a red-hot iron in both hands.
