tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1087209917357998348.post4123052226799773149..comments2023-04-28T15:09:19.782+03:00Comments on Turkey File: Tyranny by the Majority – towards a definition of freedom and democracyAlan Scotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11275977153986269003noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1087209917357998348.post-20460264386830187052013-08-21T13:58:15.951+03:002013-08-21T13:58:15.951+03:00I've now had time to read the material on that...I've now had time to read the material on that site - and it is a thought-provoking piece, for sure. I think I would have preferred a different title to 'Why Democracy is Wrong'. Maybe something like 'Why Democracy isn't Working'. The article certainly details the failings within most 'democratic' systems in today's world, but stops short of offering any truly convincing alternatives. As far as I could see, four options were offered:<br />1. Tweaking democracy to get better results - in my opinion, generally the best option.<br />2. Secession - well, sometimes it is probably necessary, but will usually require a good deal of spilled blood, eg the Irish Republic<br />3. Simple Overthrow - well, if all else fails, it may be the only option, but as with 2. it will usually result in a good deal of bloodshed.<br />4. Some kind of non-democratic system. Nice if you can find yourself a benevolent dictator (see my post on Turkey's Atatürk) but even then, sad to say, there will be many unhappy citizens. Syria's Asad, for example, is a non-democratic leader coming from a religious/ethic minority in a country where those things are pretty important.Alan Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11275977153986269003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1087209917357998348.post-66996712155693851752013-08-18T22:11:14.002+03:002013-08-18T22:11:14.002+03:00I appreciate the feedback - and I took a quick pee...I appreciate the feedback - and I took a quick peek at the site you recommended. Clearly I will need to devote some time to reading it, but thanks for the link. Are you Paul, by the way?Alan Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11275977153986269003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1087209917357998348.post-28591426258092301252013-08-17T07:17:41.292+03:002013-08-17T07:17:41.292+03:00Thanks for this thoughtful piece, Alan. I would ag...Thanks for this thoughtful piece, Alan. I would agree that democracy of the kind that most countries practice nowadays has tended to turn into corporate oligarchy. Democracy that respects the rights of minorities and allows for pluralism of cultural practice and opinion requires not just votes, but active and public discussion. It also requires (in addition to those conditions mentioned by Idris Bal) civic participation and engagement, accountability on the part of government functionaries to the citizens they ultimately serve, responsiveness of those in power to those on whose behalf they exercise that power, and transparency of functioning by the state. Unfortunately, these four elements do not function even in advanced democracies as much as they should, as seen by the reactions to national security and terrorism-related issues in a number of self-proclaimed "democracies". Furthermore, it is disturbing and confusing to see the way democratic and liberal discourse is implicated in some of the most heinous war crimes in recent years. <br /><br />You might find the discussion interesting: http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/democracy.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1087209917357998348.post-1875712237656204162013-08-12T12:34:49.848+03:002013-08-12T12:34:49.848+03:00Is that a vote cast for majoritarianism? Shock! Ho...Is that a vote cast for majoritarianism? Shock! Horror!Alan Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11275977153986269003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1087209917357998348.post-87656190689584623562013-08-12T12:32:35.136+03:002013-08-12T12:32:35.136+03:00Fascinating piece which explores very intelligentl...Fascinating piece which explores very intelligently the complexities inherent in the simple proposition that is democracy. I wonder if you have any Chinese readers who can give their perspective?<br /><br />I, for one, am not a fan of referenda or mobile phone polls, as in my view matters of importance need to be decided after proper debate, and multiple polls tend towards knee-jerkism and are prey to media manipulation. Better, though not perfect, to allow the majoritarianly-elected government to decide.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1087209917357998348.post-12519231742140201622013-08-06T13:42:39.718+03:002013-08-06T13:42:39.718+03:00Thanks David. For sure, you are right about powerf...Thanks David. For sure, you are right about powerful lobby groups perverting the democratic process - and the Swiss system of binding referenda has a lot of appeal.Alan Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11275977153986269003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1087209917357998348.post-74791585001848051432013-08-06T13:32:09.121+03:002013-08-06T13:32:09.121+03:00I personally believe we can no longer have a syste...I personally believe we can no longer have a system where people vote and governments do what they like after. Of course the USA was supposed to have a Constitutional barrier to mob rule, by establishing certain things that democracy couldn't tamper with, but that's been trashed for all the world to see - and the sight is not pretty.<br /><br />I'm starting to think that direct democracy is the only answer - made possible by instant online and mobile telephone voting. I can see no reason why with the technology we have now, all major decisions - like "shall we go to war?" "Should marijuana be legalised?" should be put to the public vote.<br /><br />At one time I would have thought this was a dangerous form of "majoritarianism", where the pubic would make all the wrong decisions. But I've changed my mind. I now believe that ordinary people (if given such a say) would come up with better decisions than those made by those we have elected.<br /><br />Truth is, once elected democratically, the political system is then managed by vested interests - lobby groups, large business etc. And these groups are not representative of most people. The military-industrial complex or AIPAC in the USA come to mind.<br /><br />At one time I would have said a strictly enforced constitution was the answer, but apparently not. Direct democracy is likely to produce better results than what we have now. <br /><br />The only other option is to shrink the size of nations and governments. I'm quite sure that democracy words better in smaller areas - like the Swiss Cantons, which do use a lot of direct democracy. <br /><br />One thing I am certain of, the system we have now is dysfunctional and does not deliver.Davidhttp://www.sovereignlife.comnoreply@blogger.com