Richard North, EUReferendum, has posted what would appear to be the first of his articles that he promised in the run-up to the meeting which is due to take place next weekend in Harrogate. At that meeting it is the intention to set 6, maybe 7, “demands” in a similar manner as did the Chartists in the 19th century. An interesting question is posed, one that asks whether representative democracy has had its day.
To consider what is “democracy” it is first necessary to consider the origins of the word; and from Wikipedia we learn its roots:
“demo- + -cracy, from Middle French democratie (French démocratie), from Medieval Latin democratia, from Ancient Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratia), from δῆμος (dēmos, “common people”) + κράτος (kratos, “rule, strength”).”
In other words, taking a simplistic and logical view, democracy translates as ‘people rule'; which means that representative democracy, as we know it today, is not democracy in any manner, shape or form; but a bastardized version of ‘dictatorship’, hence my continual use of the terms “elected dictatorship” and “democratized dictatorship”.
When considering that one of the problems the attendees at Harrogate will have to confront is the difference twixt what I term ‘faux democracy’ and ‘the real thing’, the question that then arises is: what is ‘the real thing’? Is it not necessary to first decide on a system of democracy, especially when considering how to apportion power and the balance of power?
I have attempted to play Devils Advocate and as a result it would appear that what has arisen is that in considering how to fix what is a rotten system of democracy and proposing as a first step some ‘demands’, we have a ‘chicken and egg’ situation?
As ever, just asking…………