Is this democracy? And if it is democracy does it lead to good governance?
Not on recent evidence.
What can one sensibly say about the bizarre period we are living through? For instance in 2016 here in the UK the electorate were persuaded to elect a known liar as Prime Minister. Three years later he was kicked out for – guess what? - telling lies.
Only a few thousand Tory party members were then invited to elect his replacement. They chose a woman with an extreme right wing ideology and who was furthermore funded by the IEA, the Institute of Economic Affairs who are in turn funded by the oil and gas industries.
Her economic incompetence saw her last as Prime Minister for just over three weeks. To be replaced by the unelected runner-up in that tiny Tory party election. The millions in Britain's greater electorate had no say in the choosing of either.
So much for democracy, so much for good governance.
The failure of UK's democracy doesn't end there. Beset now by the UK's first-past-the-post unrepresentative democracy, its peculiar extremes, I really miss our being a part of the European Union, its remote, cautionary presence. I imagine their technocrats responding to the Tories' latest preposterous policies with a “You want to do WHAT?!”
For so long now I have had doubts over democracy as a system of governance. Democracy was intended to replace tyranny by the few with a tyranny of the many. A neat turn of phrase which failed to take into account the self-interest of the wealthy, and how they can so easily influence and even undo democracies.
Those few have made sure that the majority of democracies, their tyranny of the many, hasn't worked.
During the last few decades we have been sorry spectators to the money-grubbing of our parliamentarians. Prior to the invasion of Ukraine, from the then Prime Minster down, Russian money came flooding into Tory coffers. Nor were the Tories the only party taking money from dubious sources: the Israelis and the Saudis continue to fund several Westminster MPs, as do many multinational corporations via one shell company or another. The leader of the Labour Party for instance accepted £50,000 from an Israeli source.
Ours is a democracy bought, packaged and sold back to us.
Will proportional representation be an improvement? Will it lead to good governance? Possibly, depending on the method of PR chosen. Might get rid of bipartisan bickering. I doubt though that there will be any improvement while our parliamentarians continue to accept payment from external sources and the national media continues to serve the interests of the wealthy.
In the meantime national and supranational democracy is an illusion. Mass media – funded by the wealthy few – will all too easily sway that percentage of the population who do bother to vote. They elected a known liar here and voted against their own self-interest to leave the European Union. (Russian money funded the Brexit campaign.)
At times I have thought that it'd be better by far that, once a fair constitution has been agreed and established, to let technocrats run the country. For the government to be open, but responsive only to petition and appeals via the legal process. That being the only route whereby civil rights and responsibilities could be changed.
Anything rather than these paid-for democratic politicians trying to second-guess a nation's mood. Note 'mood', an emotional rather than a rational state.
One has to bear in mind that, in a nation like the UK, more of its population will be tuned into pop music stations than to questioning stations like Radios 3 and 4, whose listeners one would hope decide who governs us.
That is those who listen to any radio station. The greater proportion of the international population watch 'entertainment' TV, and switch channels when the news comes on. Any new political opinion will be taken from newspaper headlines, courtesy of the wealthy few. Or, ensconced in their social media echo chambers, they will remain closed to arguments new.
Which is why, the European Union having been established with human rights at its core, I so miss – not only its open internal borders – but its oversight. I know that, had we still been members, the EU would not have allowed the UK's now dangerous use of pesticides, its discharge of human sewage into our waterways, its madcap economics, its deliberate undoing of our national health service, its bonkers transport systems, its underfunding of the legal process....
© Sam Smith 18th May 2023
Not on recent evidence.
What can one sensibly say about the bizarre period we are living through? For instance in 2016 here in the UK the electorate were persuaded to elect a known liar as Prime Minister. Three years later he was kicked out for – guess what? - telling lies.
Only a few thousand Tory party members were then invited to elect his replacement. They chose a woman with an extreme right wing ideology and who was furthermore funded by the IEA, the Institute of Economic Affairs who are in turn funded by the oil and gas industries.
Her economic incompetence saw her last as Prime Minister for just over three weeks. To be replaced by the unelected runner-up in that tiny Tory party election. The millions in Britain's greater electorate had no say in the choosing of either.
So much for democracy, so much for good governance.
The failure of UK's democracy doesn't end there. Beset now by the UK's first-past-the-post unrepresentative democracy, its peculiar extremes, I really miss our being a part of the European Union, its remote, cautionary presence. I imagine their technocrats responding to the Tories' latest preposterous policies with a “You want to do WHAT?!”
For so long now I have had doubts over democracy as a system of governance. Democracy was intended to replace tyranny by the few with a tyranny of the many. A neat turn of phrase which failed to take into account the self-interest of the wealthy, and how they can so easily influence and even undo democracies.
Those few have made sure that the majority of democracies, their tyranny of the many, hasn't worked.
During the last few decades we have been sorry spectators to the money-grubbing of our parliamentarians. Prior to the invasion of Ukraine, from the then Prime Minster down, Russian money came flooding into Tory coffers. Nor were the Tories the only party taking money from dubious sources: the Israelis and the Saudis continue to fund several Westminster MPs, as do many multinational corporations via one shell company or another. The leader of the Labour Party for instance accepted £50,000 from an Israeli source.
Ours is a democracy bought, packaged and sold back to us.
Will proportional representation be an improvement? Will it lead to good governance? Possibly, depending on the method of PR chosen. Might get rid of bipartisan bickering. I doubt though that there will be any improvement while our parliamentarians continue to accept payment from external sources and the national media continues to serve the interests of the wealthy.
In the meantime national and supranational democracy is an illusion. Mass media – funded by the wealthy few – will all too easily sway that percentage of the population who do bother to vote. They elected a known liar here and voted against their own self-interest to leave the European Union. (Russian money funded the Brexit campaign.)
At times I have thought that it'd be better by far that, once a fair constitution has been agreed and established, to let technocrats run the country. For the government to be open, but responsive only to petition and appeals via the legal process. That being the only route whereby civil rights and responsibilities could be changed.
Anything rather than these paid-for democratic politicians trying to second-guess a nation's mood. Note 'mood', an emotional rather than a rational state.
One has to bear in mind that, in a nation like the UK, more of its population will be tuned into pop music stations than to questioning stations like Radios 3 and 4, whose listeners one would hope decide who governs us.
That is those who listen to any radio station. The greater proportion of the international population watch 'entertainment' TV, and switch channels when the news comes on. Any new political opinion will be taken from newspaper headlines, courtesy of the wealthy few. Or, ensconced in their social media echo chambers, they will remain closed to arguments new.
Which is why, the European Union having been established with human rights at its core, I so miss – not only its open internal borders – but its oversight. I know that, had we still been members, the EU would not have allowed the UK's now dangerous use of pesticides, its discharge of human sewage into our waterways, its madcap economics, its deliberate undoing of our national health service, its bonkers transport systems, its underfunding of the legal process....
© Sam Smith 18th May 2023