Theory of Indivisibility: Origins, Current Complexities, and Transitioning Away from Democracy
This post corresponds with Episode 22 of my podcast Theory of Indivisibility, where I talk about the evolution of Democracy. Be sure to check it out on Google Podcast, Apple Podcast, Spotify, or Stitcher!
In the previous transcript, Transitioning Away from Capitalism, we explored future economic systems and some of the ways that people and companies are transitioning away from Capitalism.
Now it’s time to look at the evolutionary origins, current complexities, and how my theory of indivisibility applies to democracy. This time, I’ll cover all three elements in one transcription, similar to the one on patriarchy.
What is Democracy and where did it come from?
A democracy is a political system, or a system of decision-making within an institution, organization, or country, in which all members have an equal share of decision-making power.
How were decisions made before democracy?
For the first approximately 290,000 years of our (homo sapien) existence, our pre-historic ancestors lived in egalitarian hunter-gatherer nomadic bands. In these groups of generally 50–100 individuals, often tied closely by familial bonds, decisions were reached by consensus or majority and many times without the designation of any specific chief.
It’s important to note that this form of egalitarianism still exists in isolated indigenous groups around the world who managed to escape colonization.
Approximately 10,000 years ago during the agricultural revolution, a large majority of our homo sapien ancestors began farming and became sedentary for the first time, which led to the development of villages, cities, and then states as human populations began to spike exponentially. This growth in population led to the transition away from egalitarian decision-making and ushered in systems of power-over and control (authoritarianism) into human societies for the first time. This led to rulers (chiefs, kings, queens, oligarchs, and aristocrats) making decisions for masses of people under their control for thousands of years.
Until the system of Democracy was initiated in the Western world…
In the year 507 BC, an Athenian leader by the name of Cleisthenas introduced a system of political reforms that he called demokratia, or “rule by the people”. It was the first known democracy in the colonized world.
This system was comprised of three separate institutions: the ekklesia, a sovereign governing body that wrote laws and dictated foreign policy; the boule, a council of representatives from the ten Athenian tribes and the dikasteria, the popular courts in which citizens argued cases before a group of lottery-selected jurors.
Discontent from the Athenian middle and working-class people who made up the army and navy prompted Cleisthenas to create these political reforms. Prior to these reforms, the Athenian aristocrats held a long-standing monopoly on decision making.
The Greek historian Herodotus wrote, “ In a democracy, there is first, that most splendid of virtues, equality before the law.” However, this “equality” was limited to a small segment of the population: Athenian men 18 and older, and excluded Athenian women, resident foreigners, and the group that made up the majority of the population: slaves.
Democracy in ancient Greece only lasted for 2 centuries, but it inspired future representative democracies around the world like the one that would later be created in what is now the United States of America over 2000 years later.
Like everything in nature and in human societies, Democracy as we know it today didn’t just happen at the snap of a finger or based on one decision by one person. It evolved over the course of thousands of years and was derived or inspired by procedures found in many cultures and governments.
Similar to the ancient Greeks, the founding fathers of American democracy never intended to grant “equality” before the law to all American citizens. Initially, only adult male European American landowners were granted the right to vote.
The ancient Greeks practiced direct democracy, however the American founders implemented a indirect or representative democracy. In this system, REPRESENTATIVES are chosen by the people to make decisions for them. The Founders preferred the term “REPUBLIC” to “democracy” because it described a system they generally preferred: the interests of the people were represented by more knowledgeable or wealthier citizens who were responsible to those that elected them. Today we tend to use the terms “republic” and “democracy” interchangeably. A widespread criticism of representative democracy is that the representatives become the “elites” that seldom consult ordinary citizens, so even though they are elected, a truly representative government doesn’t really exist.
Current Complexities of Democracy
Instead of listing and exploring the various issues with Democracy, this time I’ll share my position and beliefs on the topic for you to explore in the spirit of authentic dialogue.
People in the United States are well aware of the variety of issues that exist within this country’s governance model. However, most people continue to invest time and energy into it with the hopes that “it will be better this time” or “it will improve if my person wins”.
I’m not one of those people. I no longer vote because I believe that our current governance system is divisive, dysfunctional, and oppressive to people and the environment. Notice that I said the system and I didn’t blame politicians.
If you’ve been following this publication from the start, you have a systems-thinking understanding that the design of our social systems are responsible for producing the conditions that lead to the behaviors of the people within them.
This is why I believe that we need to create and transition to a new governance system and divest from the current one. At the heart of my stance is my belief in and understanding of the the design of natural systems which are collaborative. As we’ve discussed in previous transcripts, my belief is that human-made systems should mimic systems found in nature.
Our current governance systems are rooted in debate, coercion, power-over and control dynamics. I believe that we need to transition to governance systems rooted in authentic dialogue, consent, and power-with, and collaboration dynamics.
Whenever I share that I don’t vote, I usually get the same arguments and pleas from family members and peers:
- People died for my right to vote
- If I don’t vote I can’t complain
- If I don’t vote the “bad guys” will win
Instead of me giving an answer for each of those sentiments, I’m going to refer you to an article entitled “You’ve Got To Stop Voting” by Mark E Smith that addresses each of those sentiments as well as others.
In the article, Mark posits that boycotting elections is the only proven non-violent way to delegitimize a government. He uses South Africa as an example stating,
“South Africa endured many years of violence under the Apartheid regime. Many people and countries worldwide boycotted Apartheid, but the US government insisted on supporting the Apartheid regime, saying that while the US abhorred Apartheid, the regime was the legitimate government of South Africa. Then the Apartheid regime held another election. No more than 7% of South Africans voted. Suddenly everything changed. No longer could the US or anyone else say that the Apartheid regime had the consent of the governed. That was when the regime began to make concessions. Suddenly the ANC, formerly considered to be a terrorist group trying to overthrow a legitimate government, became freedom fighters against an illegitimate government. It made all the difference in the world, something that decades more of violence could never have done.”
Mark goes on to give a few other historical examples before listing out and offering a response to the common sentiments of those who believe that voting will lead to the transformation needed to become a socially and environmentally sustainable society.
He lists a total of 13 and I’ll share #1:
- Not voting is doing nothing.
“If you’re doing something wrong, or something that is self-destructive or hurting others, stopping might be a good idea. If delegating your power to people you can’t hold accountable has resulted in the devastation of your economy, do you really want to keep doing it? If granting your authority to people you can’t hold accountable has resulted in wars based on lies that have killed over a million innocent people, do you really want to keep doing it? If granting your consent of the governed to people you can’t hold accountable has resulted in government operating on behalf of big corporations and the wealthy instead of on behalf of the people, do you really want to keep doing it?”
The future of governance: conflict resolution and egalitarian decision making
What are some of the ways that people are already transitioning towards governance systems rooted in authentic dialogue, consent, power-with & collaboration?
- Authentic Dialogue
- Prison abolition
- Sociocracy
- Cooperatives
Authentic Dialogue is the opposite of debate. Debate is rooted in competition, right vs. wrong, and conflict. Authentic dialogue is a communications framework that leverages conflict to bring humans together. By using authentic dialogue, participants acknowledge and welcome conflict as an opportunity to learn, grow, and expand their creative collaboration. To learn more about authentic dialogue visit: I Go to Grow.
Prison abolition is something that will require a restructuring of our entire society. All forms of social and environmental sustainability are interconnected with this push to abolish prisons and the criminal justice system as it exists today. In 2020 with the Black Lives Matter movement, after the killing of George Floyd, the Minneapolis Police Department chose to defund the police. People in this country have been working to abolish prisons and defund the police since the 1960s, and we are just now beginning to see the work of activists taking effect over 60 years later.
Sociocracy is a governance and decision-making process that ensures the voice of each person is heard, and that no one is oppressed by any decision made.
Cooperatives are usually community-run, grassroots organizations in which all stakeholders have decision-making power. Employee-owned cooperatives have been emerging for some time, and are aiding the transition away from hierarchical business models.
As society moves towards more sustainable, cooperative systems, the effects ripple throughout all areas of life. Many parents are now applying egalitarian decision-making processes through methods like conscious and respectful parenting. Learning institutions are following suit as more egalitarian schools emerge, such as Agile Learning Centers. At every level, from families to educational institutions to businesses and governments, there is evidence of society transitioning away from power-over and control systems towards more sustainable, collaborative systems.
Until next time,
I love y’all, Peace
Dr. Sundiata Soon-Jahta
We are building community around this work here. This is a place where you can gain access to support for your work (liberation, anti-oppression, sustainability, & etc.) and discussion groups for ongoing reflections and authentic dialogue about creating solutions.
2023. Podcast brought into written form by Ray Lightheart
