Menu
header photo

Voice of Albion News Journal

You may like...

Democracy Under Threat - And What to Do About It

15-01-2016

By Andrew Gruffudd

Voice of Albion democracyDemocracy is a funny thing - in the peculiar sense.

Lauded 'round the world (apart from those countries whose leaders nakedly prefer tyranny in its various forms - from theocracy to dictatorship) as a panacea for all ills, it is usually practised in a way which falls far short of what it's supposed to say on the tin.

For instance, here in Britain we have what amounts to an elective dictatorship.  Naturally, by the standards of certain other countries our electoral system is "free and fair", but it is in reality nothing of the kind.  However, let's not dwell on this at this point - we will come back to it later.

The point is that what we call democracy in the modern context is an illusion.  But for now it's better than nothing.  That said, what we have now is threatened, firstly by the European Union, and secondly by the United Nations.

European Union Hegemony

For the European Union, the solution of sovereign nations into a continental agglomeration is anti-democratic.  Of course, we all get to vote on treaties, European Union representatives and the like, but it's still farcical.  It's farcical because a small number of people voting for issues which effect just them is democracy in action, but the larger the electorate, the less democratic it becomes - the larger the number of people who have to accede to the wishes of the majority.  So, the population of Britain, which currently stands at around sixty-eight million, can have a broadly representative vote; but the European Union's population of about ten times that number can't be so democratic.  When, say, four hundred million people in, let's say for sake of argument, the PIIGS countries, vote for something which runs contrary to the interests of the Danes, there's usually nothing the Danes can do about it.  Obviously, the administration of a EU-wide ballot is a difficult and expensive business, and so it's usually decided in the Council chamber - which amounts to the same thing.  In the real world, this is why the UK's fisherman have such a pitiful quota, and why Spanish trawlers can denude our waters with impunity, whereas woe betide the British fisherman who ventures south.

World Domination

But an even greater threat exists in the form of the United Nations under the guise of international agreements meant to mitigate against so-called man-made climate change.  As we understand it, from various sources, the United Nations - in the shape of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - wishes to impose a worldwide government whereby it can effectively close down capitalism by various means, including an imposition of transaction taxes of the order of two percent.  This might seem trivial, but when your profit from a transaction is under two percent, the game is not worth the candle.  Other impositions are rights of legal personality for "mother Earth" and an international climate court to which only western countries are accountable.  The IPCC has tried, in many international climate conferences over the years, to impose such a world government system - to which there is no democratic provision appended - but has always been stopped, thus far, by activists such as Lord Christopher Monckton who, with the aid of science and data, has managed to block the political shenanigans proposed.  That said, the IPCC has managed to put in place various offices of such a government, ready for the sheepish acquiescence of world leaders transfixed by Frankfurt-School-type Svengalis.

What to do about it

There are two methods by which political control can be put back where it belongs - in the hands of the people.

Immediately, the focus is on making our elected representatives accountable.  We do this by asking pointed questions, mostly starting with "why?"  Supposing, for instance, you tackle them on the European Union question: ask them if they support Britain's membership of the Union, and then ask why the answer they have given is valid.  Keep asking why until either you are satisfied you have the truth, or they cannot give a relevant answer.  You then tell them what you think,  If enough people do this enough times, said representatives will have to become more accountable - there's no other way.

Longer term, we should reform democracy so that it's representative of all, at all times.  Currently, you see, you go to the polls once every five years or, if there's a rumble in the political jungle, at bye-elections.  For the rest of the time you're stuck with the government you elected, be it one week after the event or four years hence.

We propose that polling be done only at Parish Council level - but then whenever enough of the population served by that council feels the need to test them.  The majority of Parish Councils held by a political party runs the district council; the majority of parties represented at district level controls the county council.  Then, the majority of parties at county level controls the regional council, and the majority of regional parties controls the country.  Then, disgruntlement at any level can trigger Parish elections, which could alter the shape of government at any time.

Naturally, this isn't a perfect system, and there are flaws which can be ironed out - but it will bring self-determination, real democracy, back into government: that's got to be good.

Because the death of democracy is no laughing matter.

Go Back

Comment