Democracy is the worst form of government. (I know, it’s Churchill, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day). I have written before on Brigid and politics. Or indeed politics in general. But I want to talk about democracy in specific today.
First off, let’s look at the full Churchill quote:
[I]t has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time; but there is the broad feeling in our country that the people should rule, and that public opinion expressed by all constitutional means, should shape, guide, and control the actions of Ministers who are their servants and not their masters.
It’s at the same link as above and it opens up another few approaches of exploration, even if you include just the few words after the usual quote. There are, of course, different forms of this system, but mainly, it can be described as: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
What is democracy?
It’s actually quite hard to come across an exact definition. Seriously – I’ve looked. Yes, we’re got the dictionary definition above, but have you seen the loopholes with that?
Even just the phrase “eligible members of a state” is open to so much interpretation…
So let’s look at the commonly accepted factors that feed into a democracy.
- The rule of the people
- The people’s right to rule
- Legal equality
- Political freedom
- Rule of law
Now, I’m not going to question too much the people’s right to rule. I believe in personal sovereignty and I’ve discussed it before. And something being legal or illegal isn’t necessarily a go or no-go sign to me. Slavery used to be legal. Non-heterosexual relationships used to be illegal. Hell, women wearing trousers used to be illegal. So, y’know – legality is not always the best guide of right and wrong.
But it can offer a guide as to what’s considered acceptable and what not in terms of the society you live in. Or visit.
Legal equality
Legal equality can be an interesting concept. The Proclamation of the Irish Republic was fairly advanced for it’s time:
The Irish Republic is entitled to, and hereby claims, the allegiance of every Irishman and Irishwoman. The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and of all its parts, cherishing all the children of the nation equally, and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien Government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past.
(Yes, it’s wikipedia, but look, it’s a handy resource to grab that wording from and it’s accurate)
The later Constitution didn’t exactly support all the proclamation promised, of course. Democracy, when it eventually arrived in Ireland, was very heavily influenced by the conservative forces left after the leaders of the 1916 Rising were murdered by the British. (Yup, don’t care if it was legal – it was legal by the oppressive forces of a foreign government.) I was sure I had written before on the differences between the Proclamation and the 1937 Constitution, but maybe it wasn’t on the blog. I’ll cover it in a later post.
But really – the Proclamation was very open to the nation, the citizens and equality rights and opportunities. Much of this was because many of the writers of said Proclamation were the “radical” people: Thomas J. Clarke, Seán Mac Diarmada, Thomas MacDonagh, P. H. Pearse, Éamonn Ceannt, James Connolly,
Joseph Plunkett.
James Connolly in particular I remember as being very firmly egalitarian. In fact, his were the only forces in the Rising where women were stationed and commanded. Just as an FYI.
Legal equality in a democracy
But “legal equality” means different things to different people. And while most modern democracies make some effort to make sure everyone is “equal before the law”, I think we all know that there are plenty of forces at play so that an oppressed minority has a very different experience of the law than a rich, privileged member of society.
Just take the difference between rich and poor in most legal systems. The difference between pro bono work by a lawyer fitting in a case between other obligations and a well-paid, well-supported one focusing on one case to the exclusion of all others. That’s not saying the pro bono work is useless – it’s very often all some people have available to them. But having more money, means you can navigate most legal systems with ease.
Very often, legal equality means that you don’t get special treatment due to your position in society, although the recent events in the US might suggest otherwise. And look, to me, neither event is really that surprising.
Local TD’s in Ireland have been instrumental in planning decisions, water supplies, phone lines, road routes… all sorts of local questions that sometimes need a bit of a push through the county council. I don’t like it, but it’s one of the ways to get things done here.
That doesn’t mean those decisions don’t have to stand up to scrutiny though. And it certainly isn’t a free for all in terms of what might go on in an area.
A TD caught drink driving faces the same consequences as the rest of us – albeit, with probably more resources to offset the inconvenience. So there are levels of equality here, and I think the most important element is the one where we are all equal before the law.
Something demonstrably not the case in certain areas of the world.
Political Freedom
If you Google “political freedom”, you get all sorts of nice explanations and theories. For me, this means I have the right and ability to vote for whomever I wish, without my vote being made public (unless I choose to make it public) and without any consequences for voting how I choose. From the government anyway.
There might always be disagreements within friends groups and family regarding politics. That’s different. But there shouldn’t be coercion, control or other means to affect someone’s vote other than the considerations they deem important.
Now, there’s always a bit of nuance here. Making it considerably more difficult for folks in certain areas or certain demographics to vote is obviously wrong. I do like what I’ve read about India’s approach to voting for example. They include assistance for those who are not able to vote via postal ballots or at polling stations. Although I’m sure there are many ways to improve this process (There always are!) Even this consideration is an improvement over many countries. To be fair to my own country, Ireland also has assistance for those who have disabilities, infirmities or other issues, as well as those who are of no fixed abode.
Now, while there are many in Ireland might outline the complete lack of actual difference between candidates in many areas, we do have a multi-party system. Traditionally, the country has been dominated by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, and some might say that freedom to vote was controlled by various entities… but technically speaking, we’ve always had at least three parties to vote for since the inception of the State. But traditionally, either Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael, or in recent years, both, have been in power.
Plus, there would be a tradition in many families until very recently of voting one way or another and changing that could lead to some very… interesting… conversations round the dinner table.
However, there is very little to stop the Irish people – legally speaking – sharing their opinions on politics, writing/ talking/ discussing politics, engaging in politics… (aside from the usual economic issues, anyway).
Rule of Law
Rule of law denotes a concrete system of self-government grounded in a stable and accessible legal process. It features a system based on clear, objective and publicly disclosed laws; and a diverse, competent and independent legal profession. Effectively, the ideal ensures that the government exercises its authority in accordance with a legal framework that assures individual liberty and national development. This is the definition of the rule of law.
The rule of law is a foundational aspect of democracy as I understand it. If there are no laws, if it is just anarchy, well, first off, what’s the point of a law? And secondly, how does one enforce the rights and responsibilities of a democracy without the rule of law?
The World Justice Project has developed a working definition of the rule of law based on four universal principles:
- Government officials and agents must be accountable under the law;
- Laws are clear, publicised, stable and fair, and protect fundamental rights, including the security of persons and property;
- The process by which laws are enacted, administered and enforced is accessible, fair and efficient;
- Access to justice is provided by competent, independent, and ethical adjudicators, attorneys, or representatives and judicial officers who are sufficient in number, have adequate resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.
Fairly simple right? Except… those who work in the legal system, i.e. adjudicators, attorneys and judicial officers, tend to be those who come from wealthy backgrounds, ruling out many areas of the communities they serve. This is something the legal profession in Ireland recognises and is working towards correcting. The Irish Government has also taken steps towards improving diversity within its members. (Not always brilliant steps, but steps nonetheless)
Ireland has a policing by consent system of implementing said rule of law. And as a nation, we are proud of that fact. As well as the fact that most of our Gardaí don’t carry firearms. People are sometimes surprised on seeing the TV ads in Ireland – we have very hard hitting road safety campaigns, and recently, the sharing of personal pictures on line, as well as coercive control and less-obvious forms of domestic abuse are being publicised, as well as the routes to get help.
What else to consider
Now, this isn’t to say that democracy is perfect. The different ways of reckoning numbers in ballot counts can lead to significant differences in election results. Just comparing the UK’s “first past the post” options versus Ireland’s “Proportional representation” can lead to endless fun and games. (For info, I prefer Ireland’s way of doing things. No way to “waste your vote” then. )
But democracy covers a wide array of arrangements.
Nice to see that Ireland is down as a full democracy and showing higher on the scale than the UK. (Although understandable when they still have a monarchy). But that’s just national pride.
While the majority of countries in the world at least pretend to some degree of democratic activities, the variation in the types and levels of democracy are interesting to see.
Now another interesting map to view is below. This is from the V-Dem Democracy Index and shows the countries currently showing strong movements towards or away from democracy. I provide this with no comment, but invite you to check out the website.
However, the US, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Mali, Benin, Botswana, Benin, Tanzania, Burundi, Serbia, Hungary, Slovenia, Poland, Turkey, India, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Thailand, and the Phillipines are listed as moving towards autocracy. Madagascar, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, South Korea, Uzbekhistan, Georgia, Armenia, Niger and Ecuador are moving more towards democracy.
Responsibilities in a democracy
That’s right. If we want to keep our democratic rights, then we need to engage with our responsibilities as well. Particularly for those living in the countries identified as changing above.
So, first off, participate in your democracy. For most of us, this means voting at a minimum. But realistically, it also means engaging with the politics in your area. Learn about the issues. Concern yourself with who’s making what decisions and if these are the people you want making those decisions. Maintain vigilance against restriction of rights and privileges. Remember, the fascists across the world love a good restrictive law. It helps them immensely!
Be informed about your duties. Are you required to serve on juries? Military service? Paying taxes? Accepting the laws as they are? (Even if you are working to change them?)
Actively participate in your democracy, in fear you might lose it!
