Imagine a circle, with 2 points on the circumference directly opposite each other. One point is stability, the other is anarchy.
If offered the choice, I suspect most people would choose stability. And that is democracy.
Society, to function effectively for all, requires consensus. It requires an agreement to compromise on those points that divide us, and come together around those that hold us together. Simple really. And in small social constructs this can be achieved fairly easily.
The larger the societal structure, the more organised and regulated the machine of concensus becomes. Representation becomes a requirement where numbers work against a discussion including the whole group. But this too can work, and has, and can do so in the future.
However, it can only work if the principle of democracy is clear and unequivocal. It should mean a compromise, so that, although not everyone will be 100% happy, no one is 100% miserable either. Cooperation. Compassion. Cohesion. All good words. All that should be the basis of our approach to democracy.
Unfortunately, the human race being what it is, this would make life too easy. When numbers grow larger, groupings with common interests develop, and the concensus around the point of stability become more polarised. But, as long as we remember why we ar doing it, whether the consensus settles a little to one side or the other of the central point shouldn’t make too much difference. Just a different approach to arrive at more or less the same place.
But with the construction of organisational machines comes a hierarchy – of expertise, of assumed superiority, of the imposition of different social stratas. And all of a sudden you have the distorted, biased, unequal and selfish ‘democracy’ we know and hold in contempt.
So, what do we do? We take the only thing we have left, our vote, and we make statements. Sometimes these votes can be a positive force. When a party goes too far away from where it should be – supporting and protecting the powerless – then a re-alignment is justified. Unless the representatives decide to ignore the voice of complaint.
Sometimes, however, these can be a negative. A protest against becoming invisible leads to the UK leaving the EU. A protest against a right-wing clogging of the democratic process leads to the selection of a 4 times orange bankrupt as the potential leader of the most powerful country in the world.
Let us try and remember what democracy really means, rather than the tribalism that it has become.
And to those who manage the machinery, remember why you are there – to keep the machinery working, not for yourself, not for a museum exhibition, but as a means of providing a supportive concensus for all.
cherokoffdotcom 