Sticky post
Democracy - introduction, part one
Monday, December 26, 2005 5:08:05 AM
Why we need democracy?
The present system of representative democracy does not work.
The involvement of USA in the Iraq war is one of the most symptomatic and painful examples in the history of international politics. This powerful "democratic" country was led to a no winnable military intervention by false pretenses of the group of politicians driven by their hidden agenda. All checks and balances instituted by the creators of the constitution did not work. Given the political power and free access to the propaganda machine allowed them to restrain a critical analysis and mount a "patriotic" myth, equating a defence of national interests with invasion of Iraq in the name of spreading the democracy. Long term consequences of this approach are surfacing now. The US citizens and many "Western" nations are hated by Muslim extremists. The same mistakes which were made after the WW I by the British are repeated by US government.
In present political representative democracies once every four years or so we are given a chance to elect people who, having their own short term interests in mind decide for us what is the best for us in the short and in the long term. These people make decisions in all aspects of life and governance. Wake up, fellow citizens! Nobody knows everything about everything any more! What are the election criteria applied by electors?
- Party leader?
- Party policies?
- Ethnicity?
- Individual candidate?
- Vote against other aprty/candidate/ethnicity?
Why I am forced to make a choice between two seemingly good candidates? Just because they belong to different parties? What we need parties for?
The natural alternative would be to replace the exisiting vertical divisions of political thought with horizontal ones. Lets say Ms. X has some experiences in the delivery of health services. To improve the systems she joins a Health Services stratum of people with similiar interests and makes her voice heard. Heard not only when it is time to say yes/no but also when one has to decide what needs improvement ar correction, what should be the priority, what are the feasible solutions what might be the possible outcomes, how to test the short-listed solutions, what criteria use to evaluate the results, and finally - how to implement the conclusions of the whole process.
The same or similar mechanisms can be developed for any aspect of political life.....
Why we have the representative "democracy" and nobody dares to upset the status quo?....
Lets imagine that we descend on a civilization without a political system and we have to develop it from the scratch. What we would do?
Conclusions:
- The representative democracy should be evaluated? What forces are behind the status quo?
- The need for polital parties should be revised?
- The democratic system principles needs some thought?
In the next part:
The antidemoratic mechanisms within political parties.
Ruciane
The present system of representative democracy does not work.
The involvement of USA in the Iraq war is one of the most symptomatic and painful examples in the history of international politics. This powerful "democratic" country was led to a no winnable military intervention by false pretenses of the group of politicians driven by their hidden agenda. All checks and balances instituted by the creators of the constitution did not work. Given the political power and free access to the propaganda machine allowed them to restrain a critical analysis and mount a "patriotic" myth, equating a defence of national interests with invasion of Iraq in the name of spreading the democracy. Long term consequences of this approach are surfacing now. The US citizens and many "Western" nations are hated by Muslim extremists. The same mistakes which were made after the WW I by the British are repeated by US government.
In present political representative democracies once every four years or so we are given a chance to elect people who, having their own short term interests in mind decide for us what is the best for us in the short and in the long term. These people make decisions in all aspects of life and governance. Wake up, fellow citizens! Nobody knows everything about everything any more! What are the election criteria applied by electors?
- Party leader?
- Party policies?
- Ethnicity?
- Individual candidate?
- Vote against other aprty/candidate/ethnicity?
Why I am forced to make a choice between two seemingly good candidates? Just because they belong to different parties? What we need parties for?
The natural alternative would be to replace the exisiting vertical divisions of political thought with horizontal ones. Lets say Ms. X has some experiences in the delivery of health services. To improve the systems she joins a Health Services stratum of people with similiar interests and makes her voice heard. Heard not only when it is time to say yes/no but also when one has to decide what needs improvement ar correction, what should be the priority, what are the feasible solutions what might be the possible outcomes, how to test the short-listed solutions, what criteria use to evaluate the results, and finally - how to implement the conclusions of the whole process.
The same or similar mechanisms can be developed for any aspect of political life.....
Why we have the representative "democracy" and nobody dares to upset the status quo?....
Lets imagine that we descend on a civilization without a political system and we have to develop it from the scratch. What we would do?
Conclusions:
- The representative democracy should be evaluated? What forces are behind the status quo?
- The need for polital parties should be revised?
- The democratic system principles needs some thought?
In the next part:
The antidemoratic mechanisms within political parties.
Ruciane
ruciane

| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | |||
