Constitution Day is once again approaching,
and as we marvel once again at its remarkable role in our sovereign, secular,
democratic and unitary state that secures for us all justice, liberty, equality
and fraternity, we should cast our eyes abroad. Because while we recognize that
the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of
the human family is indispensable for freedom, justice and peace, it seems that
our young republic needs to cast its eyes upon its older siblings, to see where
they went wrong, and how we can keep from following in their worrying path.
The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy
Index for 2016 was released, and Namibia scored 6.31, 71st in the
list, and is ranked as a ‘Flawed Democracy.’
Perhaps more surprisingly, is the that venerable institution hailed at
the model for participatory democracy, the United States, has dropped a few
places on the list – and is no longer classified as a ‘Full Democracy,’ but
also now a flawed one, ranked 21st alongside Italy.
While it would be simple to ascribe this
drop to the election of President Trump, the reality is that this slump in its
rating is not due to his election, but rather that his election is the result
of a slump in its democratic values. Indeed, the US election results and the
Brexit vote have both been described as the surprises of the year for
democratic countries, and yet they had two opposing effects on the rankings of
its respective countries.
In the United Kingdom, the Brexit vote
encouraged political discussion and participation to an extent not seen in
decades, culminating in a 72% voter turnout, much larger than is usual for the
United Kingdom. People are not apathetic to politics – especially when they
believe they’ll be able to make a difference. In the aftermath of the Brexit
vote, all political parties in the UK experienced an increase in membership,
and this moved the UK up to 16th place in the Democracy Index.
And yet somehow the media and the
politicians have interpreted these results as a ‘backlash against the
democratic order’ and a threat to liberal democracy. What an odd
interpretation. The voters defied the politicians, and this is a threat to
democracy? Perhaps it should be seen as a vindication of democracy – these
votes were the consequence of the failings of modern democracy, not the cause
of it.
This is because over the past 50 years, the
political parties have been changing. As they started to lose touch with their
constituents, the voters, they’ve tried to regain ground lost by closer to the
centre – to the government voted in. Their views began to diverge from the
voters they neglected and left behind. In these countries, the old left/right
divide in politics began to mean less and less, as the issues voters cared
about were ignored, and parties split on issues they themselves cared about,
but not the voters.
As a result, voters felt they no longer had
much of a say in government – it was by the parties, for the parties. The
failing of that democratic model became evident in voter apathy – lower and
lower turnout at elections. This had a corrosive effect on confidence in
government. Fewer than 1 in 5 American surveyed believe that the government can
be trusted to do what is right, and only 9% had confidence in Congress.
This lack of democracy – the lack of a
voice! – provided the impetus for the Brexit vote and President Trump. But
before we get complacent, we should consider that the same can and will happen
here. We’ve seen it start in South Africa, with lower voter turnouts and the
rise of the EFF. Namibia’s scores on the Democracy Index for Functioning of
Government is a mere 5.36, showing a lack of confidence, and our score for
Political Culture is also low at 5.63. We’ve already seen the signs – the low
voter turnout for local and regional government elections, for example.
In countries with a dominant single party,
like Namibia or South Africa, those in power too can become complacent, and
lose touch with the issues voters care about. With a declining trust in
government, the same sudden challenge from the electorate will come forward,
and just like the UK and the USA, the political elite, unused to having their
worldview challenged, won’t know what to make of it.
There, they blame popular ignorance and
xenophobia. Secretary Clinton called them the ‘basket of deplorables.’ They
call it a backlash against the democratic order – and some are even arguing
that democracy is thus not working, and that it is wrong to trust ordinary
people to make political decisions. Unfortunately, this reeks of a new
institutionalised aristocracy that wants to decide what’s best for you, without
your input.
How does that respect or recognize inherent
dignity the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family?
Does that sound like it is promoting freedom, justice and peace? They say power
corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Those in power will contrive
of the means or reason to remain there should they lose the consent of the
governed. It is why we have our constitution, the safeguard against misuse of
the power we grant our government. And that is why we must always remember that
the first line of defence for the constitution remains, and always will be, We The
People.
No comments:
Post a Comment