The Deep Vision: The Hypocrisy of the Democracy

The Hypocrisy of Democracy, How? May I first remind you of the cruelest example of the twentieth century, I remind you of “The Third Reich” ,of Hitler, the man who had the vote of the people, but whose idealistic dreamlands led to the deadliest war in the history of mankind: Nothing became of Democracy but a cradle for a totalitarian national-socialist regime.

At the same time, on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean there was the American democracy about which years later, the American historian Gabriel Jackson wrote:

“In the specific circumstances of August 1945, the use of the atom bomb showed that a psychologically very normal and democratically elected chief executive could use the weapon just as the Nazi dictator would have used it. In this way, the United States—for anyone concerned with moral distinctions in the conduct of different types of government—blurred the difference between fascism and democracy.” [1]

There are thousands examples all throughout the history from the Far East to the west. I lure your attention to a quote by Plato:

“Aristocracy degenerates into timocracy, timocracy degenerates into oligarchy, oligarchy into democracy and democracy into tyranny”

******

So is a Democratic government a student who is destined to try and fail to fulfill his aims of freedom and peace? No, it is not destined to fail to bring us freedom, but it will fail if it is absolute in his aims to reach freedom. Democracy means the rule of majority and if absolute it will lead to tyranny of the majority, where one leader would think he has the vote of absolutely all the people for absolutely all time as Hitler did and as Lenin did.
Thus, democracy is nothing but the freedom of individuals who are the majority. There are no limits to the rule of majority. The majority is supposed to act for its own good; that is for the good of his nation. What we should strive for is Isonomy. Isonomy is the equality within the Rule of Law. Here there would be a law to stop any leader of any kind from having absolute power.
In the nonacademic literature the word “democracy” is used to show the need for isonomy but in concept and action it is often ignored that rule majority alone is not enough to give the right for authority.

******

A classic example would be the French Revolution where the young ship of democracy drowned as its leaders rode it on the waves of absolutism. A revolution that was strongly motivated by the enlightenment movement of philosophers of the time dried the hearts out of hope when leaders justified their goals by the support of the people that they thought they had. That is why in the French Revolution many of oppositions were sent under guillotine as the democratic movement leaders became the dictating leaders whom they were mocking in the past regime.
The same story has happened in many other revolutions throughout history taking into despair the people, the philosophers. If the majority demands freedom, the majority will rule, the majority will revolutionize, it will choose a leader and it will provide it with authority. However, because the majority is an emotional mass of people who believe in a single person or group as the leader, it will provide the authority but forget to limit it with a new one. And what is a limitless authority but an authoritarian, dictating regime.

******

The Iran’s revolution of 1978 is quite similar to movements like the French revolution. Those who had the voice of majority took the upper hand, overruling any non-Islamic political form government. Democracy was a stillborn child whose small body imprisoned freedom of choice in the dead flesh and bones.

The recent reformist movement couldn’t break free of the dead prison and so will not any other form of reform that believes in the promotion of Islam in people’s private lives. Don’t get me wrong. I am not crossing out “Islamic” out of the “Islamic Republic of Iran”. I am just underlining the “Republic”. In order to underline the “Republic” any kind of revolutionary act will only replace a charismatic leader, or and idealistic elite for the contemporary government. To control Power, is not to replace it with another seemingly tame Power but to balance it with one.

******

So, true democracy (isonomy) is only reachable through strengthening the oppositions. Thus undoubtedly, any form of ideal activity that carries dreams of revolution and complete regime change is destined to fail. However unfortunately, any such campaigning produces a literature filled with champions and advocates of people and provokes the emotions of the masses resulting in a leader who has the vote of the people but a different voice from the people.

It is clear now that neither the contemporary president was a democratic one despite his 20 million votes nor is the new president despite his 17 million votes. Neither can and will act for what they got the votes for.

A fortunate future can only be seen through a stronger opposition to the government that carries the voice of different classes of people rather only the middle class.

1. Civilization and Barbarity in 20th Century Europe

The Deep Vision

About Me

Friday, November 11, 2005

The Hypocrisy of the Democracy

0 Comments: