Thinkers’ Corner features theoretical essays on everything from politics to the paranormal, science to religion, crime to love, offering a different way of thinking best described as Rational Holism. Scroll down for essay.
Democracy is the best political system but has yet to be understood. Born out of individual empowerment, it can only thrive in an ideology which shares this value. Hence, democracy is actually the political arm of capitalism, and can only work in a capitalist system.
This said, single systems are always wrong. They lead to tunnel vision and totalitarianism. Hence, a true democracy should always have differing systems below the political ideal, be they religious, philanthropic or socialistic.
Similarly, democracy provides no meaning or moral ethic against excess, so underlying systems are required to define these influences.
There is always a danger of such influences becoming fanatical. This is always wrong. Indeed, there could well be a ‘law of opposite effect’ which states: the more fanatical a person or system, the greater the chance of it achieving the opposite effect.
Hence, essential to all systems is the requirement of moderation and tolerance to other systems. Any system should be seen as nothing more than a guide.
However, balanced debate requires such systems to be vocal. Non-vocal debate – as seen in centre ground politics – does not achieve this, resulting in extreme law. Vocal debate irons out all issues and actually leads to moderate law.
Counter to true democracy is the political party. Parties infiltrate underlying systems into the legislature where they do not belong. Further, parties offer careers to members and inhibit members’ freedom of speech. These influences take away their loyalty to electorate and conscience, and lead to a system having overall power in society.
Parties should be degraded by the instigation of a system that encourages independent parliamentarians. Such representatives would guarantee greater debate and whittle away the power of all parties.
Another important factor is the ratio between representative, electorate and legislature. If a parliamentarian represents too many people to allow adequate access, he is divorced from the people and a single system will be his primary concern.
Similarly, if a legislature has too many parliamentarians, it becomes nothing more than a rubber stamp for an over bearing executive. As I see it, the very maximum of people per representative is 100,000, and the maximum number of parliamentarians per legislature is 600. If either of these numbers is higher, the balance shifts from the people to the system, and democracy moves towards totalitarianism.
How do politics and society really work? In the
dozens of essays in I, Society I try to answer.
See Bookstore, top, or