Democracy

______________________________________________________________________
Yesterday, I wrote about the goings on in the U.S. about legislating away Collective Bargaining. I tripped over a great interview with Noam Chomsky, by Amy Goodman analyzing the U.S. drive to bust the unions. . . 
"Democracy Uprising" in the U.S.A.?: Noam Chomsky on Wisconsin’s
______________________________________________________________________

Just BTW - In Egypt - not a single woman on the committee to write the constitution. . .    just sayin'.
The Egyptian Centre for Women's Rights
 ________________________________________________
Today I am thinking about "democracy" . . . 

Definitions of democracy on the web include:  

• the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives
• a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them
• majority rule: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group

What is democracy?  Is it always "representative"?  Does one "have to believe in it"?  Is it a "political orientation", a natural occurrence, a learned tactic, a principle or an ideology?  Is it an economic statement, a political one or a social ideal?  Do we have it in Canada?  Is it "democracy with limits", "democracy with exceptions" or just limited democracy.  It certainly exists in only certain spheres - like at the ballot box, but not generally at work, and for too many women and children still not at home.


People think about democracy a  lot and conflate it a lot with capitalism.   I wrote a blog about that a while back - but now I think people are possibly even more confused about democracy but also have had "enough".   The word "democracy" is getting thrown around a lot as the middle east engages in "demonstrations for democracy". or "pro-democracy demonstrations".   

I began to think about "democracy" (again) more earnestly when an article in an Israeli paper made mention of "democracy with exceptions". . . meaning that you cannot vote for those we do not like. (i.e Islamists)   For instance, even though, in Gaza,  the Hamas was elected (though now saying, according to some suspect sources, that they will not participate in elections) and Hugo Chavez was elected President in Venezuela (see South of the Border - a film about the South American/Bolivarian revolutions) -- through "democratic elections". . . on the news, though, (even CBC radio recently!) they are often called "dictators" as they are opposed to U.S. hegemony in their respective regions. . .


So, trying to relate these thoughts about "democracy"  to my city, region, province, country, work and home life. . . I thought first about work -- I teach courses to union members, generally trying to make them "active";  to give them tools and information to help them mobilize, organize and monitor in their workplace.  The union is truly democratic and run by those who are elected and/or by those who take on tasks and show up to do the work.   But, given the total size of the organization few people are real participants in this truly democratic organization.  So, the processes are democratic (and they truly are) but the participation is small and so is it really "democratic"?   Do people get what they want?   Do they want what is good for them?  Is it the greatest good for the greatest number? What if the majority want to leave the union, or bargain away overtime, in order to feel like management rather than union employees.  Will this really improve things for them at work?  Does democracy just mean "majority rules"?  Does it need to be tempered with individual rights, ad rights for minorities?   What about the right to eat, or have a house, or work, or have children?


I have been thinking about a comment made by a participant in a class in December, 2010.  She said that people "don't believe in democracy anymore", and, by that, she did not mean that people don't see it as an ideal - but that people no longer think there is actually any democracy, anywhere.   That's why they do not show up to vote in elections - it makes no difference, they say, there is no point in participating - someone (the rich and corporations if they think it through, though most don't)  else's needs and desires will be filled but not mine. . .whether I donate to a political party, vote in an election, write a letter to the editor or get on the street with my co-workers. I won't get what I need, so what is the point?  (Partly for myself - I wonder sometimes - what do you need in Canada?  when 80% of the world lives on $5.50 (USD) per day or less. . .  just sayin' - should probably think about that 80% of the world more and stop sweating over our receding democracy. . . ) 


Still connected to thinking about democracy - Last summer, I attended a fabulous conference in Montreal - held by Civicus.  The Civicus World Assembly was 800 or so people from 94 countries talking about how to make progress with civil society players - "the people" - not political parties or governments or corporations but people (and they definitely include unions in the list of "civil society actors".|)  

Aside --  I got access to this pricey conference (for an individual in North America - those from the south pay less) by being a "professional blogger",  part of their Web 2.0 team and was one of the very few folks there from a union (and the union did not actually send me) but I hope that more union folks will attend this year - it was fabulous, and definitely worthwhile!) Go check it out -- http://www.civicusassembly.org/  60% off now!  Unions should send people - I cannot go this year because the dates,  in Sept.,  are right at the beginning of my busiest period in my union's two year education cycle.  But it is one last time in Montreal next year (2012) and I hope to be able to attend before it moves to some more distant part of the world. 

At one 2010 Civicus workshop session (at a table of 6-7) two of the participants were from Burma (Myanmar) and when I complained about the lack of participation of Canadians - especially in political parties or election outcomes, even voting - an older man from Burma - said - "ah and here we are thinking that if we just had pluralistic political parties and democracy, all of our problems would be solved!"  (Guess it is all a matter of perspective and how many people in your country watch TV and who controls the content of the TV or radio broadcasts).


Another aside (a little trouble staying coherent this morning!)  - www.Rabble.ca  had a great article about how we believe things to be "true" and that if the same person tells you over and over wrong facts or strange analysis you will soon come to believe that many people believe those same things. It was in an article about Fox News North bt I cannot find it now. . .   Anyway, if there is no truth, is it possible democracy can exist.   If the majority want what is good for a tiny minority (the rich are blessed by god and we should deny them nothing) is that democracy?


If the majority of Canadians want the rich and corporations to pay more taxes,  and if even the NDP is taking it off the table - and the Liberals (who have the same Neoliberal economic policies as the Conservatives) for the moment still say they want the most recent reductions rolled back. . . What IS THE POINT?  Maybe Capitalism simply does not allow for real democracy.   What do you think?