Democracy is not the Panacea of Every Ills That’s Afflicting This World

Democracy tends to divide citizens in developing countries, rather than making the people united. Photo: Independence Day Celebration in Asmara, May 24, 2013

Democracy is not the Panacea of Every Ills That’s Afflicting This World

By Barnabas Araya Yohannes,

The question of just government has been one of the eternal themes of philosophy since Plato and Aristotle to Emanuel Kant and Karl Marx.

Pilate asked Jesus "What is truth?" (John 18:38). Behind the question of Pilate arises another still more important and more profound question, the eternal question of mankind: "What is justice?" No other question has been discussed so passionately; no other question has caused so much precious blood and so many bitter tears to be shed; no other question has been the object of so much intensive thinking by the most illustrious thinkers from Plato to Kant; and yet, this question is today as unanswered as it ever was. It seems that it is one of those questions to which the resigned wisdom applies that man cannot find the definitive answer, but only try to improve the question.

Some philosophers have considered democracy to be the most just form of government, others monarchy. Democracy, with its inherent principle of equality, is just insofar as every citizen can be called upon to share in responsibility for the exercise of state power, is the best system. On the other hand, that it has the potential to degenerate into ochlocracy (the mob rule), however, was recognized by thinkers as early as Aristotle.

The problem of today's multi-party democracy consists in a fundamental contradiction:

how is it possible for a party to be impartial? Can a ruling party seek only the common good without being disloyal to its role as representative of the interest groups that have elected it? An impartial party is in fact a contradiction in terms. This unsolved problem today remains as topical as ever.

Another problem in a multi-party democracy is that there is always somebody else to blame for one’s own failures. Nobody takes the full responsibility.

The worst corruption of justice is apparent in two extremes: tyranny and anarchy. Tyranny of the totalitarian state is unjust government. A Philosopher, Pieper, emphasizes that in the human world there can hardly be a worse or more hopeless disaster than unjust rule . . . Everything in the world depends on rulers being just.

Yet, although the despot has no will to do justice, tyranny is still preferable than anarchy because there is at least a central political will, a monopoly on force that prevents the outbreak of individual violence. Life and death decisions are made by just one (albeit arbitrary) power, rather than by the chaos of mob violence.

In contrast, in the other form, anarchy, the law ceases to be valid because there is no power to uphold it. It results in mob rule, the law of the jungle; it is fittingly described by the key phrase in Thomas Hobbes': “Man is a wolf to man”.

The recent history of Somalia, a failed state, is a good example. The political conditions, under the rule of the despot Siad Barre, were despicable enough. Following his downfall, however, State structures collapsed totally, so that anarchy and chaos prevail to this day.

Iraq is another example. For the preservation of democratic political formula in Iraq, over 100,000 Iraqis have lost their lives (most of them innocent), 4,459 Americans have died, 33,080 Americans have been wounded, there are 100,000 suffering posttraumatic stress disorder and the staggering cost (at $2 billion per week), it now stands at 4 trillion dollars -- evidences such as these have caused the congress of the U.S., the American people, and the rest of the world to ask the critical question "is democracy worthy all these human and financial cost?"

First of all, if democracy automatically brings unity and, consequently as a result of that unity, peace and prosperity comes out, none of that exist in Iraq. Secondly, when people are divided and, consequently, fighting against each other, they create a fertile ground for external forces to manipulate them. Now, you cannot blame the external forces for their own failure. The results of all these cumulative facts of disintegration, turmoil and bankruptcy have been uniformly devastating. It only shows a picture of a total failure of a total democracy.

Without a doubt, anarchy is the greatest threat to human society. It means the loss of any kind of security, the end of civilization, chaos, a war of all against all.

In summary, democracy can only function where there is already at least a minimum of order. Where order has completely broken down and social relations have practically ceased to exist – in short, where there is chaos – democracy is very difficult to establish, as recent historical experience has shown. In such cases, a firm hand may be required as an interim solution and as a way of bringing the situation under control. Then, there remains the problem that such 'interim' situations tend to degenerate into tyranny or despotism.

When the British ruled India (c.1600-1947), for example, they ruled it with feudalism. However, before they left, they introduced democracy. They knew exactly what they were doing. Their aim was to divide the people; create conflict; and then sell weapons.

In India, particularly, which had been under Muslim rule for six centuries, there was a Hindu population of 41 million, against a Muslim population of 7 million, (according to the Census of 1931). During the six centuries, the Muslims were ruling the Indians. The Hindus and the Muslims had lived together as fellow-citizens for centuries.

That was, of course changed, when the British colonized India. When the British wanted to introduce democracy, the Muslims (minority) refused to be ruled by the Hindus (majority). Consequently, Indians were divided against each other until India, Pakistan, Burma, Nepal, and Sri-Lanka were divided. These chain of events has eventually resulted in perpetual conflicts between India and Pakistan with the threats of weapons of mass destruction.

Salutations!

Sponsored Ads