Representative democracy: “If it ain’t broken…” “Well, maybe it is broken!”
Why should we take the risk to change a system albeit imperfect for something new that has not been tested?!
Well, it depends if you think that it is broken beyond repair or not.
Let’s say, I am living in Brussels (which is true) in an old house (1875 to be precise). I’m amazed at the liberty the floors have taken with geometry. Wherever you drop something, it will roll away.
But I really like that house with the creaking wooden floors. Even if there are a thousand things to fix. It’s mostly small stuff and maybe a few bigger ones (like leaking pipes). It is pretty straightforward: Broken things can be fixed, the house can be renovated. It is still functional overall and there is no need to demolish and rebuild.
Even if there were inundations in the basement after strong rainfall, you could still drain and dry it. The house would hold and continue to serve its purpose: Allow us to enjoy family life and gather with friends- in other words, live the good and the bad days.
For many, this is democracy today. An old house that needs a bit of fixing. Maybe even a good makeover or renovation but nothing that would justify blowing it up to build something new.
But for my parents, who are living in a nice house in the South of France, it’s another story. A few years ago after a strong storm and deluge of water, cracks appeared. The sandy ground on which the house is build started to slide down slowly because of the accumulated water.
In their case, it is a bit harder to know what to do. As it happened the whole neighbourhood was declared a disaster area. Maybe the house itself is not broken but the foundations are unstable. It is not even clear if it would be allowed to rebuild anew given the nature of the ground.
I guess you got my point.
The debate about representative democracy is very much about this.- In which house are we living — my house in Brussels or my parents’ house in the South of France. It is clear that it is not only about the house itself. It is also about the ground on which it is built.
Here are a few arguments why representative democracy as a system might be broken beyond repair:
- Corrupted politicians co-opted by powerful lobbies
- Decision-making systems paralysed
- Extreme polarisation of public opinion
- Short-sighted visions linked to election cycles
As a matter of fact, a good symptom of the failure of the current system is absenteeism.
There is a paradox: while people are more and more conscious of the issues and willing to engage they feel disempowered by a political system that does not represent them.
The bottom line is: One third of the voters cannot simply be wrong or bad citizens — that would be too easy.
The fact is that many have lost faith and are looking for an alternative in every direction. Even in the direction of the so-called illiberal democracy models that are flourishing.
So maybe you still think that it is not broken but how useful or efficient is it in resolving today’s challenges who are affecting all of us?
Climate change — with its increased occurrences of hurricane categories 4 & 5
Environmental degradation and unsustainable use of ecosystem — 7.4 million hectares of forest lost every year
Demographic and growing consumption — from 7.6 billion humans today to 10 billion in 2050. Earth Overshot Day was on 1st August this year.
Growth based economic model, the raise in inequalities and urban poverty — that’s the famous 99% vs 1%
Gender inequalities — 80% difference in salaries in the Western world
Increase in populism and xenophobic discourses — Europeans overestimate the numbers of foreign born in their respective countries two or three times.
Let’s take one of them: raising inequalities and its vicious circle.
In liberal economies, politicians have in fact little to say as the private sector tends to follow its own rules and logics.
Building new consensus to better control the economy requires tremendous strength and efforts which can easily be overturned thanks to targeted lobbying.
On the other hand, removing what has been built in terms of social safeguards, redistribution of wealth is not that complicated following a logic of the less common denominator.
You can see how long it took the Obama Administration to set-up the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and how little time it took the Trump Administration to dismantle most of it.
When generalised, this process contributes to increasing the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few who become even more powerful. And yes, I’m simplifying here.
The economic elites know that they just need to invest in the politicians sensitive to their views.
And this is something quite easy as the political and economic elites are often one and the same: How many former ministers, prime ministers or head of states are now happily working for hedge funds and sitting on the board of other big companies?…
What has allowed for that to happen?
Well, it is pretty simple: the current political system with at its heart representative democracy.
It has allowed interest groups to use the power grabbing and self-interested political representatives to work for them and not for us and the common good. And yes, it is normal that groups try to preserve and expand their privileges but it is a reason to let it happen?
Here is why representation is at the heart of the problem:
To be elected, wannabe politicians need to convince you — or at least a majority of us; to seduce us with their personality rather than with their ideas.
And even if you were still looking at their programmes, did you notice that they are becoming increasingly similar? Mostly, they become increasing unrealistic, leading to a litany of empty promises…
Well that is partly normal because they are mostly meant to convince you to elect them.
Once they are elected the same story goes on again — they need to stay popular.
Imagine they would go for something unpopular — even if it were unpopular only for a minority. If this minority was well organised, they would just need to yell loud enough.
The government would back down and no reform would take place (in France we are witnessing this over and over again). Because if they become unpopular then they won’t be elected again.
In that context, you can forget about long-term reform perceived as painful (like reducing the environmental footprint or reforming the pensions).
The system is short-sighted and superficial because it is built on the sandy rocks of representation.
Thinking that we could keep this house by simply sealing the holes in the walls is not going to work in the case of representative democracy.
So, if the house is broken, what do we do?
The danger would be to rebuild the house in the same place with the hard stones of autocracy as we see happening in many countries. It would not solve the problem as the ground it is build on is not suitable.
So, how do we rebuild our house in a better place?
A place where it would not stand on the sandy rocks of representation, slowly but surely sliding down hill.
A place where it can protect all its inhabitants, a place where they can all contribute to take care of the house, a place where it feels good to live.
