Jean-François Revel in his book The Totalitarian Temptation
(1977) wrote in regards to democracy (and love) that there is no accepted
definition but instead clear symptoms.
In other words, the proof that a country is a true democracy is whether
it is a free press, safe environment for opposition, protection of minorities
and exchange of leaders, to name a few. Of course, there are intermediate states
between ultimate democracy and absolute dictatorship but an analysis of all the
political conditions quickly demonstrates which citizens actually have rights.
Pseudo democracies have always
existed. The Soviet Union, Mexico and
India had regular elections while Hitler was an elected leader, albeit only
once. Such countries generally have constitutions and legal codes that formally
but not in practice allow protest and opposition. Modern examples of fake democracies include
Turkey and Russia. In these countries, the same leader has ruled for more than
a decade, as president or prime minister, with any effective opposition leader
being arrested or, as Putin has done, assassinated. The press is effectively
government run. Of course, the
established leaders are quite popular. In fact, one sure sign of a
non-democracy is when the ruling party received more than 80% of the vote.
Worldwide, today's democratic politics
are quite volatile. Many countries conduct elections in an environment of
non-tolerance or even hate between the competing parties. While the tone of the discussions in these
countries can be disconcerting, especially in terms of racism, the mere
existence of a public debate on key issues and its presence on all forms of
media without fear of a legal or extralegal penalty provides hope for the
future. The United States and Europe will emerge stronger as the candidates and
the public discuss and determine their place in the world and the role of
immigrants in their societies. In Israel, the call for increased control of the
press by the ruling party is worrying but the court system and major parties
still promote freedom of speech. India and Mexico, formerly fiefdoms of their
ruling parties, frequently replace ineffective governments to the benefit of
their countries. Brazil even impeached its president, an unlikely event a few
decades ago.
According to Heisenberg's theory of
uncertainty, an observer can have total knowledge of location or direction or
partial knowledge of both but not complete knowledge of both. In other words,
the closer you look at the trees, the harder it is judge the forest and vise
versa. As a foreign observer watching the political processes occurring
worldwide, I appreciate democracy and relish the viewing of them even if the
actual content of the public debate is disturbing or insulting. In such
societies, controversial issues are resolved for the public good, not for the
benefit of a specific party or leader. As Revel said, in practice, with all of
its imperfections, democracy is much better for people than totalitarianism.
No comments:
Post a Comment