Saturday 30 July 2016

Government by the People

Government by the People

Lincoln’s passion that the populace should have government for the people and by the people resonates throughout Western democracies even if it is expressed in differing terms. However “by the people” is more problematic than it looks.

If we go back to ancient Athens, that fabled birthplace of democracy we begin to see problems. Plato lived through the turbulent days of an oligarchy imposed after the Spartans defeated Athens, then revolution and restoration of democracy. He remained apart from the bloodthirsty oligarchy, who killed off the democratic leaders, even sending death squads after those who fled the country. He saw the injustice of political opponents executed so that their property could be seized. But when democracy was restored he saw that “the people” were scarcely any better.

Plato scornfully noted how easily the demos or people could be swayed by an artful speaker. Particularly one, as he wrote, who promised to “plunder the rich and give to the poor”. However his conclusion, that government should be not “by the people” but by the most able thinkers is exactly what British voters have rejected in their decision to leave the European Union with its burgeoning unelected technocracy.

It is a long time since I studied Plato and Aristotle, but I think it was the latter who made the distinction between “mob rule” and “constitutional democracy”.

If my memory serves me correctly (since Google has let me down!) Aristotle saw the same problem as Plato and said in effect: “If the demos rules unrestrained by law and custom will they not, being in the majority, say 'let us plunder the rich, by God it is just'”. However his solution was to limit what the assembly could vote by overarching rules.

If we look at one element of government: the dispensing of justice this difference is clear. In the Wild West the lynch mob ruled. Then lawmen brought peace and progression to “a fair trial”. Law courts with due process, rules of evidence and the ability of the accused to put their side of the case are are much superior to the lynch mob. Interestingly fair trial was commanded back in the Old Testament, where ideals of justice were repeatedly set out and the danger of lying witnesses and the fickleness of the crowd warned against. However every few generations we seem to have to learn them anew – now we seem to be falling back into the lynch mob mentality with “trial by social media”.

Lord Acton, author of the famous “power corrupts...” quote also said;
The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.”

In recent times this has been borne out in Western democracies by the proliferation of regulations ostensibly aimed at protecting minorities which has led to the tyranny by these minorities over the majority – which simply inflicts the claimed injustice on even more people!

The reservations all these thinkers have had about rule “by the people” can, I think, be summed up by saying: “We are all sinners”. We are all capable of being selfish and greedy, so there is a danger that we will elect those who promise us most. We can go with the crowd and the spirit of the age against what is righteous and just.

I think two things are required to make democracy work:

1. Rule of Law. Where there is a constitution, hundreds of years of judicial precedent on what is right and just and an independent judiciary that can curb the excesses even of an elected president
2. Moral Backbone. Where there are enough people of good conscience to save the nation from the particular evils taking flourishing at that time.

Without these, government by the people is only as good as the worst half of the people, and historically, that is not very good.

Saturday 16 July 2016

The West is Streets Ahead of the Rest

The West is Still streets Ahead of the Rest

This is important to remember. We may still be failing to attain not only the lofty but also the attainable ideals of government of the people. We may be in danger of losing even what we have. But we are still so many streets ahead of the rest of the world.

In government for the people, voters are, as I said last post, expressing dissatisfaction with the current situation. In this they have good reason: In too many areas governments are not really acting in the best interests of the population, they are repaying favours to people who helped them to power or responding to lobby groups. In other areas they are remiss in their duty of care for the populace. But compared to others they are still remarkably caring, capable and honest.

To take recent past regimes, the Communists are probably the most horrifying examples. Stalin let 7 million (plus or minus a million or so) peasants starve to death when many could have been saved. Mao presided over a famine mostly due to government policy where 2 or 3 million people who complained about the policies were murdered and some 34 million people starved.

Brutality and government indifference to the suffering of the people on this scale is so awful that our minds don't want to take it in.

On a more homely scale and in our own cultural past has conditions we would not wish to live under. Consider Robin Hood. Look behind the derring-do and there is shocking treatment of the people by the rulers

In the present there are so many contenders. North Korea, Iran, Zimbabwe are only the beginning of a very long list of totalitarian regimes where the ruling elites do not give a fig for the well being or even the lives of the people they govern.

Think of many of the African countries where the people are desperately poor. The West has poured in vast amounts of aid, but most has been siphoned off by the rulers – who live in extravagant luxury and pile up enormous wealth in Swiss bank accounts while the people continue to suffer privation. “government for the people” has never entered the heads of these rulers!

In countries like Zimbabwe this is compounded by terrible government policies. For instance the “redistribution” of farms from the successful agribusinesses owned by whites to political cronies of the ruling party - who as often as not left the land unfarmed and the black workers unemployed, or ran the businesses so inefficiently that they failed, has caused massive suffering across the nation and added to the country's already serious economic woes.

Truly we are so fortunate in the West that generations before us have fought to put good government in place. Understanding this and seeing the abyss into which we could descend should make us determined to strive in our generation, not just to maintain but to improve.

Saturday 9 July 2016

Is Democracy Doomed?

Voters and Politicians

Over the years my wife and I have enjoyed cruising in various parts of the world. Particularly before the Global Financial Crisis, the majority of our fellow passengers were from the U.S. Conversations with them gave us varied glimpses of American life and politics. One theme that frequently recurred was disenchantment with politicians - both Democrats and Republicans. The feeling was that they were all in the pockets of major lobby groups, and were not genuinely interested in the welfare of “ordinary” people.

In Australia we are a cynical bunch and have long thought that too – even when it was demonstrably not true! There was a time when a railway locomotive driver – Benedict Chifley – could and did become Prime Minister of Australia. But we still joked “It doesn't matter who you vote for: a politician always gets elected!”

But recent events have shown this to be far more acutely felt now.

In the 'States the recent campaigns for Democrat and Republican nominees for President have shown extraordinary polarisation.

In the Democratic camp look at the polling by Bernie Sanders. No offence intended, but he is so close to Communist in his policies that his large following in “the land of the free” almost beggars belief. But aside from his economic policies – which have proved disastrous in every nation that has tried them – he had a vision. It would not, could not have worked in practice – but it was a vision. It evoked a utopian longing in (some) ordinary people. My feeling is that his success came because if one did not look too closely behind the smoke and mirrors, he was preaching government “for the people”.

Go back eight years. Barack Obama preached “change you can believe in”. Crown sourcing brought in huge funding for his campaign from ordinary people. Again the dream that a government would care about the general populace. I suspect that history will pass harsh judgement on his presidency, but that is not my interest here. What I am looking at is people's desire for government that does the right thing by the nation, and their feeling of betrayal in this regard.

Donald Trump. The social progressives hate him with such violent passion that I begin to think he must be OK. I read his book, and it says all the right (no pun intended) things. However eight years ago I read Obama's books and thought they were good too! So I had better reserve judgement. But whatever you political leanings you must admit he has been a phenomenon.

Again I suspect this tells us something about the man or woman in the street. Those on the Republican side of politics are also disenchanted with established politics. They too feel betrayed. They too feel political elites are feathering their own nests and in the pockets of wealthy industry groups. They may also be reacting against the failure of the socialist leaning Obama administration by looking for a more outspoken champion.

In the latter regard I am thinking of what Hayek wrote. He maintained that it was the failure of the socialist government in Germany that led to the middle classes feeling disenfranchised and turning to Hitler. He also commented that seemed to be a worldwide pattern that when socialist economic systems failed – as they inevitably did – people turned to a right wing strongman “saviour”. Nothing so dramatic in the US – yet. Nothing so radical. But a little failed swing to the left may be producing a preference for a strong, outspoken leader. As an engineer I know the value of safety valves. Better that it goes off than the boilers explodes! Trump as president may be a safety valve: you may not much like him, but maybe you really don't want the sort of leader people might flock to after another socialist incumbency!

In Australia we have just had an unusual election. The (slightly conservative) government just scraped back in, but both it and the opposition (slightly socialist) party were deserted by voters in favour of little splinter parties further to the right and left.

Naturally newspaper columnists have had theories galore as to why this is so. When you cut out the campaign related ones there is a common complaint. Voter alienation.

The perception among voters that both big political parties are living in their own little dream world rather than looking after the people who have to struggle on in the real world.

It seems to me that voters in both America and Australia (possibly many other Western countries too) have recognised the signs of imminent failure of democracy. Harsh words? Compare what is seen to be happening in our countries with these familiar words:

“… And that government of the people, for the people and by the people, shall not perish from the earth.”