political thought

Over the past few months, we have seen a glimpse of the future direction that evolution is taking us. Catastrophic destruction of the natural world has resulted in floods, fires and pandemics. We’ve known of this potential outcome for decades. However, precious little has happened to stop it occurring.

Scientists know what needs to be done, technologies have been developed, necessary changes in lifestyle have been identified.  All that is needed is to put these new ideas into effect. Political leaders have, however, failed to react fast enough.

There appears to be a fundamental problem in democracies. They are unable to deal with future risks. Most people are overwhelmingly occupied with day-to- day problems and are naturally less concerned about the long-term. And because only popular politicians get re-elected, democratic leaders are reluctant to propose action ahead of the public consensus. Leaders who have the ability to lead public opinion and inspire the public to alter behaviour, are very rare. Social media and active programmes of disinformation do not help.

Democracies have two main functions, to govern and to represent. At present they are failing on both counts. In terms of governance, they have failed to deal with change in the natural world, resulting in climate change, pandemics, loss of biodiversity.  They have equally failed to deal with changes in the economy, resulting in an insecure workforce, massive wealth discrepancies and an abrogation of power to tech giants. In terms of representation, they have failed to connect with the public and understand how globalisation and new technologies have negatively affected lifestyles. As a consequence, we have seen the growth of the gig-economy, falling life expectancy and a massive change in wealth distribution. In many countries, including the USA and the UK, leaders have reverted to a crude appeal to nationalist sentiment, blaming foreign influence for their problems.

Across the world there is a deep crisis brewing for mankind.  Democratic governments appear unable to react fast enough to the accelerating effects of evolution. They are reacting to change rather than anticipating problems and mitigating their affects. If democracies are to survive, they have to reconsider their operational processes to allow more long-term thinking. However, no democratic government appears able to look critically at its own modus operandi. Procedures once established are rarely changed. Many of the operational rules of the House of Commons were in place three centuries ago. The USA is bound by a constitution established in the eighteenth century.

The crisis is clear. Democracy in its present form appears unable to respond.

A country’s democratic systems of government age over time. It’s operational arteries, unable to adapt to a changing world, become sclerotic, and a cancer of vested interests invades the organs of government. No longer able to function for the good of all, democracies become increasingly distanced from the electorate at large.

This is most apparent in two of the oldest democracies in the world:  those of the USA and Great Britain. The USA’s democratic processes are showing the worst signs of distress. Its carefully structured systems of checks and balances have become gridlocked. Whatever President is elected, because the House of Representatives often has a Democratic majority and the Senate has a natural Republican bias, it is now rare that both Houses of Congress can agree any major legislative programme.

The US Supreme Court, by its Citizens United decision of 2010, gave companies the same electoral rights as ordinary citizens; this effectively allowed lobby groups to legally bribe Congressional candidates. The corruptive influence of money from business and the rich is now so ingrained in the American electoral system that, according to a 2015 poll, 52% of Americans believe that Congressmen are corrupt.

Britain is scarcely any better. In the British system Members of Parliament aspire to become government ministers. Hence, as it is damaging to their career prospects, government MPs rarely vote against their own side. This has given the executive inordinate power over the legislature.  Scrutiny of legislation is poor, allowing Governments to ramrod their bills through the Commons.  Curiously it is the unelected House of Lords which now provides the principal defence against bad legislation in the UK.

In Britain, as well, the wealthy are able to enhance the career prospects of their children by sending them to Private School. This has resulted in the creation of a class-based society based on wealth. For example, according to a Guardian report in 2019, nearly two thirds of Boris Johnson’s first cabinet went to Private School. As only 7 % of the population can afford private school fees, it seems that, as in America, those that have money and influence are able to unduly exercise power for their own benefit.

The result of this democratic sclerosis has been a discontented electorate, poor leadership and abysmal policy making. It is no coincidence that Britain and the USA have some of the worst records of all advanced countries in dealing with the Covid crisis.

The effectiveness of a country’s democracy can be measured by the security, health and wealth of its citizens. During the Covid crisis it has been manifestly clear that East Asian democracies looked after their citizens’ health and wealth much better than the older democracies of Western countries.  It is also clear that Chinese power and influence is growing and poses a major threat to the West.

Western democratic governments need to develop the capability to diagnose the state of health of their systems of government and develop appropriate therapies. They will need to unblock arteries of communication to their electorate and reinvent their organs of administration, if they are to avoid continued decline in world power and influence.

It’s depressing, the forces of darkness almost won. Even after 4 years of disorganised, divisive and retrograde government, almost 50% of Americans voted for Donald Trump. It seems they didn’t mind the lies and the irrational, racist and illegal behaviour. Although the less well-off were the back bone of his support, nothing had been done to improve their economic or health prospects. His much-heralded financial reforms, merely made the rich, and particularly Donald Trump, richer; his attacks on Obama Care reduced their access to medical support. Despite this, his appeal to the emotions and prejudices of his supporters remained strong and even grew.

Trump and the Republican party still deny the fact that mankind’s future depends on working in harmony with the natural world. Despite all the physical proofs in the form of storms, droughts, heat waves, ice melts, fires and rising seas, the existence of climate change is still denied. The threat of the Covid -19 virus was never taken seriously. As a result, hundreds of thousands of people died and the economy was excessively disrupted. Environmental protections were slashed and removed, threatening bio-diversity and releasing yet more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

None of these issues made any difference to his supporters. Like all populists, Trump’s appeal is to primitive emotions of tribal support. By exploiting the natural fear of change and emphasising threats from others he has built up a tribe of true believers. ‘USA’ is the cry of Trump supporters even though they represent only half the country. Threats and violence underpin his movement.

Trump and his tribe threaten all the principles of eco-humanity: liberty, by undermining the forces of law, egality by appealing to white supremacists, rationality by a barrage of lies, and sustainability by the denial of climate change.  They were not humiliated at this election. Their support has grown. This is a warning to us all.  All those who are concerned about the prospects of a sustained and happy life for our children need to take note and act.

Local democracy is in deep crisis. Starved of funds by central government, but still with the same legal responsibilities, it is struggling to cope with the many problems laid at its door.  Disconnected with its electorate (only a third of people vote in local elections), it is failing to provide adequate leadership. Council services are failing across the country. How have we got in this mess?

The BBC asked people why they don’t vote: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47666080. The responses they received should not be a surprise:

• Many of the people we speak to feel there is a disconnect between politics and their everyday lives. Everyone has issues they care about, from local planning and leisure facilities to bin collections and schools, but it can be difficult to identify how local councils operate and affect these issues.
• There is also little national attention paid to the role councils and councillors play in communities. While national politics continues to dominate headlines, it can appear that change can only happen via Westminster – and those making decisions at a local level are neglected of the due attention, and scrutiny, they deserve.
• When you have one party dominating in an area it can be hugely off-putting, with many people feeling like their votes don’t count and it’s not worth turning out.

We desperately need to re-establish effective local government. The whole political process needs a complete rethink. Reform should be based on three criteria:

1. Clear accountability- responsibility for many services is divided between central and local government. Local government should have clear areas of responsibility and the powers to raise money to manage them.
2. A clear distinction between governance and representation- the leaders of those in government should be directly elected with powers to act. In an extension of the local mayor system, local responsibility of individuals should be emphasised. Those who represent should have the power to hold officials to account. The role of national political parties should be minimised.
3. A need to engender a local community spirit and pride- local government services should be integrated with those of the charity and voluntary sectors to tackle local issues in an innovative, inclusive and cost-effective fashion.

Only when we reconfigure our local political system will we get the active and positive community governance that we need.

The issue of immigration brings into focus the developing confrontation between liberal humanist values and nationalist instincts.  Increasing levels of immigrants from different cultures have fuelled the rise in populism across the world. As a result, the international cooperation necessary to save the planet is becoming even more difficult to achieve.

The Turk Umut Ozkurmh has been pondering the rise of the far right in Sweden, where he lives. This paragraph from  his article in the Guardian is worth quoting:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/23/cosmopolitan-sweden-far-right-refuge-europe

I had to understand that the central question is, as the Swedish historian Lars Trägårdh puts it, whether it is possible to resolve the fundamental tension between, on the one side, “universal moral rules founded in notions of human rights”, and on the other, “nationally bounded claims derived from the idea of citizenship in particular nation states”.

My answer is yes, and the formula is simple: emphasise the connection between rights and duties; speed up the process of integration of newcomers (refugees or migrants) without demanding that they fully assimilate into the dominant culture, but asking them to respect the existing social contract; foster a sense of common destiny that does not necessarily require myths of common ancestry; and engage with the demand for recognition in a fair and equal way, without privileging either minorities or majorities.

Governments of the world should listen to his views  and act accordingly to avert future strife.