In the Name of the People , livre ebook

Andrews UK - Ivo Mosley

Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement

Je m'inscris

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne
En savoir plus

103 pages

English

Vous pourrez modifier la taille du texte de cet ouvrage

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne
En savoir plus

A propos
Informations
Extrait

Description

Are our 'democracies' truly democratic? In the Name of the People examines the myth of modern democracy and finds it wanting. The various oligarchies of the world blame the madness of modern life on the greed and stupidity of ordinary people: this book argues that, on the contrary, elites indulge a limitless greed for power and wealth under cover of 'giving the people what they want'. As a coda to his short book, Ivo Mosley examines what true democracy has meant over the last two and a half millennia, and examines how it could be incorporated into current political structures to give them meaning, life and accountability.

Informations

Publié par	Andrews UK
Date de parution	12 mars 2013
Nombre de lectures	0
EAN13	9781845405717
Langue	English

Informations légales : prix de location à la page 0,0550€. Cette information est donnée uniquement à titre indicatif conformément à la législation en vigueur.

Extrait

Title page
In the Name of the People
Pseudo-democracy and the spoiling of our world
Ivo Mosley
SOCIETAS
essays in political
& cultural criticism
imprint-academic.com/societas

Copyright page
Copyright © Ivo Mosley, 2013
The moral rights of the author have been asserted.
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form without permission, except for the quotation of brief passages in criticism and discussion.
Originally published in the UK by
Imprint Academic, PO Box 200, Exeter EX5 5YX, UK
Originally distributed in the USA by
Ingram Book Company,
One Ingram Blvd., La Vergne, TN 37086, USA
2013 digital version by Andrews UK Limited
www.andrewsuk.com

Epigraph
The ‘sovereign people’ is fast becoming a puppet.
- Herbert Spencer
Like a rock rolling downhill,
We have reached today.
- Ishikawa Takuboku
To destroy a sufficiently deep-seated delusion it is necessary to show not only its absurdity but also its origins.
- Lewis Namier
And then I noticed!
- David Mercer , ‘For Tea on Sunday’.
One imagines that human nature would rise up incessantly against despotism: but despite men’s love of liberty and hatred of violence, most peoples are subjected to this type of government. This is easy to understand. In order to form a moderate government, powers must be knitted together, regulated, tempered and enabled to act; we must give enough ballast, so to speak, to one power that it can resist others; this is a masterpiece of legislation that chance rarely produces and that prudence is rarely allowed to produce. By contrast, a despotic government jumps into view; it is uniform throughout; only passion is needed to produce it, and everyone is capable of that.
- Montesquieu
Cover design by Andrew Smith: andy.andrewsmith@hotmail.co.uk

Introduction
A wolf in sheep’s clothing is not a sheep: an elected representative claiming to be ‘democratic’ is not a democrat. Democracy has a simple meaning: ‘the people rule’. If the people are not ruling, then the nation is not a democracy. From the standpoint of the people: if we hire someone else to clean our windows, we are not cleaning them ourselves.
Until 1800, everyone knew these simple and obvious truths. Electoral representation was considered to be the very opposite of democracy. If it had to be given a name of Greek origin, the correct one was ‘elective oligarchy’ meaning ‘rule by a few whom we choose to rule us’. As the first chapter of this book relates, it was around the U.S. presidential election of 1800 that candidates first thought of calling themselves ‘democrats’ to win more votes. After that, it was a question of selling the illusion to all and sundry. A variety of different interest groups - revolutionaries, the new middle class, intellectuals and academics eager for employment - took up the claim, and by about 1920 it was generally accepted: electoral representation is democracy. How this happened is the subject of Chapters Two and Three.
The aim of this book is to demonstrate that it is time to dispense with this particular illusion and to introduce some real democracy. Electoral representation is a simple formula by which, in theory, any nation can get a good government. In practice, it is a means by which any nation can get a gigantic bureaucracy, become deeply indebted to a clique of ultra-rich people, and find its assets owned by multinational corporations. There is nothing mysterious or historically odd about this. Representation is a two-way business: representatives negotiate between ‘the people’ and those in power - whether that power is a monarch, a military government, a landed aristocracy, political parties or pure money. Representatives are human and do what they have to do, to keep their jobs. This is the subject of Chapters Five and Six.
This is not to say that electoral representation is in itself bad. As an active force, it makes absolutism less likely: the electorate is asked to give some kind of consent, every now and then, to the government it gets. What representation has made possible, however, is bamboozlement on a scale so vast it is impossible to comprehend. Almost the first thing representatives did in England when they became nominally the ‘supreme power’ (1688) was to make the questionable practices of English bankers legal (this is the subject of Chapter Four). They borrowed money from the same bankers (personally and in the name of ‘the people’) for their own projects: wars, buying up assets and putting those they dispossessed to profitable work (the profits going to themselves).
The first six chapters of this book are a negative and fragmentary picture of our civilization: a diagnostic report, in the hope that a coroner’s report won’t be needed soon. The final chapter is an attempt to show that democracy can be real and can work. Genuinely democratic practices have been included in constitutions in the past and still operate in certain places today. Democracy can be introduced, in its various forms, into our Western systems for the benefit of all, restraining the antics of the powerful and restoring some equity to relations between rich and poor.
Acknowledgements: So many people have helped me that I cannot thank them all; moreover, some insisted on anonymity. I would, however, especially like to thank my family, immediate and extended, for keeping me going; and Keith Sutherland for having what it takes to publish this book.
An apology: substantial changes have been made to parts of this book since review copies were printed and sent out. I apologise to reviewers and readers for any confusion that might arise as a result.

1. Is ‘Democracy’ Really Democracy?
There is no greater misnomer in our Western world than calling our systems of electoral representation ‘democracies’. This misnomer - or illusion - began to take hold around 1800. Before then ‘democracy’ was understood to mean the opposite of electoral representation. It meant citizens participating in government in three different ways: by voting directly on issues and appointments; by acting as part-time public officials themselves; and by being members of parliament-type assemblies selected (as juries are) by lot. These practices are all opposite to electoral representation.
Governments formed by election were understood to be not democratic but ‘oligarchic’ - meaning ‘rule by a few’ rather than ‘rule by the people’. The distinction is obvious and elementary. If we want to rule ourselves, we must be active in ruling, burdensome though that might be. If we choose others to rule us, we no longer rule ourselves: we are not democratic.
Here are some quotes from across the centuries up to 1800 to illustrate how democracy was generally understood. Whether these writers loved democracy or hated it, they did not think that elections were an essential part of the democratic process:
Herodotus (5 th Century B.C.):
Democracy has the fairest of all descriptions - equality in law. Offices are filled by lot, power is held accountable, and all questions are put up for open debate. - from Histories , 3.80.6
Plato (428-348 B.C.):
And democracy comes into power when the poor are the victors, killing some and exiling some, and giving equal shares in the government to all the rest. - from Republic , book VIII.
Aristotle (384-322 B.C.):
It is thought democratic if the offices are assigned by lot; for them to be elected is oligarchic. - from Politics IV,1294a.
Cicero (106-43 B.C.):
Therefore every people, or state, or republic must be ruled by an overall intelligence (consilium) if it is to last. When this is entrusted to one person, we call it monarchy; where it is undertaken by certain select people, we call it aristocracy; when it resides in the people we call it democracy (civitas popularis). - from The Republic Book I, 41,42.
Elyot, 1531:
Another public weal was among the Athenians, where equality was of estate among the people, and only by their whole consent their city and dominions were governed: which might well be called a monster with many heads. Nor never it was certain nor stable; and often times they banished or slew the best citizens, which by their virtue and wisdom had most profited to the public weal. This manner of governance was called in Greek Democratia, in Latin Popularis Potentia, in English the rule of the commonalty. - from The Book named the Governor .
Althusius (1557-1638):
The nature of democracy requires that there be liberty and equality of honours, which consist in these things: that the citizens alternately rule and obey, that there be equal rights for all, and that there be an alteration of private and public life so that all rule in particular matters and individuals obey in all matters. - from Politica , 39, 61.
Hobbes (1588-1679):
The Kinds of Soveraigntie be, as I have now shewn, but three; that is to say, Monarchie, where one Man has it; or Democracie, where the generall Assembly of Subjects hath it; or Aristocracie, where it is in an Assembly of certain persons nominated, or otherwise distinguished from the rest. - from Leviathan .
Montesquieu (1689-1755):
When, in a Republic, the people have the sovereign power, it is a democracy... Selection by lot is natural to democracy; election by choice is natural to aristocracy. - from De l’Esprit des Lois , Bk II Ch. 2.
Rousseau (1712-78):
‘Selection by lot,’ says Montesquieu, ‘is democratic in nature.’ I agree... But I have already said that real democracy is only an ideal. When election and lot are combined, positions that require special talents, such as military posts, should be filled by the former; the latter is right for cases, such as j