Recently I read an opinion
piece in The Hill Times decrying the 'Lack of
Leadership' in both the U.S. and GB given the current Cluster Fk in
both countries. It goes on to say 'The answer is fairly simply: lack
of leadership.' and that 'Unbridled populism fails unless it is given
direction, order and coherence from good leadership. Without such
leadership, both our nations appear destined to continue their
saunter towards this form of government by self-inflicted anarchy, a
truly unfortunate state.
Whilst it is unclear exactly how this writer proposes to 'fix'
this 'lack of leadership' I would suggest that leadership or the lack
thereof is not the problem. In both countries you have strong leaders
unable to proceed with their proposals due to equally strong
opposition from other elected representatives both affiliated with
their 'party' and not. The problem lies not so much with the
leadership but their fixation on looking good in the public eye so
that they not 'the other lot' will be elected to power the next time
around, its not so much about good governance as maintaining power to
move forward their particular agenda.
There is nothing new about that mindset by politicians of all
stripes in all democracies what has changed is the interaction
between those we elect and those who elect them. Back in the day,
way back, the 'representative' had very little direct contact with
his or her constituents, they got their information as to what was
going on days or weeks later via a newsheet and writing a letter was
perhaps the only way for the average citizen to contact him (and was
always a him back then). Over the years that process has gradually
evolved so that now such communications are instantaneous for those
who who, like the twit in chief in the U.S., subscribe to such
services, and certainly quite timely via on line news. Those few left
without internet connections who rely upon printed materials
delivered to their door are perhaps at a disadvantage in not knowing
about the daily shenanigans issuing out political mouths (or perhaps
that is a distinct advantage!) but will still get most important
news, probably filtered by the authors point of view, within a couple
of days.
Perhaps the point here is not so much the increased ability to
communicate a point of view or intended decision but the
instantaneous reaction and feedback from pundits and political
junkies that are increasingly coloring the decisions made by those in
power. The request from the press for a comment from this politician
or the other on an item of news before the ink is dry, to use an old
outdated phrase, hardly encourages thoughtful and meaningful
responses either. We here in Canada are not yet governing by twitter
bursts but you may be sure that as we approach the upcoming federal
election day that such communication will have a disproportionate
effect on both the perception and the results of said election. Much
to our detriment IMHO!
Support Democracy - Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers
A blog to give a voice to our concern about the continued erosion of our democratic processes not only within the House of Commons and within our electoral system but also throughout our society. Here you will find articles about the current problems within our parliamentary democracy, about actions both good and bad by our elected representatives, about possible solutions, opinions and debate about the state of democracy in Canada, and about our roles/responsibilities as democratic citizens. We invite your thoughtful and polite comments upon our posts and ask those who wish to post longer articles or share ideas on this subject to submit them for inclusion as a guest post.
Contact us at democracyunderfire@gmail.com
Contact us at democracyunderfire@gmail.com
Sunday, January 27, 2019
Sunday, January 13, 2019
Our Fragile Democracy.
A new index released this week offers a sobering look at how
democracy is faring in the United States.
According to the 2018 edition of The Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index, the U.S. doesn't even make the list of top 20—its demonstrably "flawed democracy" notching it the 25th spot.
The ranking is based on 60 indicators spanning five interrelated categories: electoral process and pluralism; civil liberties; the functioning of government; political participation; and political culture. Each category gets a 0-10 score, with the final score being the average of those five.
Topping out the index are Norway, Iceland, Sweden, New Zealand, and Denmark.
Support Democracy - Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers
According to the 2018 edition of The Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index, the U.S. doesn't even make the list of top 20—its demonstrably "flawed democracy" notching it the 25th spot.
The ranking is based on 60 indicators spanning five interrelated categories: electoral process and pluralism; civil liberties; the functioning of government; political participation; and political culture. Each category gets a 0-10 score, with the final score being the average of those five.
Topping out the index are Norway, Iceland, Sweden, New Zealand, and Denmark.
Canada's rated a 9.15, which landed it
the number 6 spot overall. Only twenty countries (12 percent) were
designated as full democracies, 14 of which are located in Western
Europe.
Meanwhile
we have this headline 'Ontario courts urged to remind Doug Ford that
Canadians ‘don’t elect dictatorships’ from
the National Observer perhaps stretching it a bit but Ford has
most certainly shown disdain for the normal democratic process and a
certain segment of like minded politicians across the country seem to
think that democratic process is more a hindrance than something to
embrace and nurture.
Enough said, support democracy for it
is a fragile thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)