"... Democracy is the only form of government which is accountable to its people".
We in the West are certainly taught that
. But think about Tribal Societies (which we all were once). Tribal Rule could be quite 'arbitrary' yet, unless an Elder, Chief or Councillor were
good at their job ... leadership, decision-making, diplomacy in both war and peace .... that leader would be gone. Replaced with one more able and/or competent.
Tribes have many advantages precisely because they are NOT democratic (in the western sense). Tribes have common blood, common values, common history, common genes. It is easy for members to equate survival of the Individual with survival of the Tribe.
Forget birthplace-of democracy-Greece. Freed by Slaves from doing any work except sports and fighting, privileged Greek men had the luxury of sitting around and talking about "government"
Democracy's roots lie in societies that have been
forced to transition from one stage to another ..... King John was compelled by his nobles to accept Magna Carta (they wanted accountability for their social contract with their king) .... The American Revolution was inspired in an English society transplanted to a New World -- with new challenges and great promises of wealth and achievement. Those who conducted the revolution knew their rights, freedoms and their history -- no taxation without representation.
Both examples have been brilliant successes - measured in all fields: war, peace, culture, the arts, the media (propaganda), commerce, science. But both countries are vulnerable to attack from within -- which we are seeing with our own eyes in real time. This vulnerability lies in the truth that (like Ju Jitzu) our strengths (freedom) can be used against us.
Life (survival) teaches that
all opinions are not equal. All that is natural is not necessarily benign. All singing voices are not sweet. All people are not inherently good. Why would any right-minded realist pretend otherwise .... unless to walk around in denial and delusional
.
90.9% of the decision-making done by governments falling into the area of "housekeeping" -- do you need a committee to figure out how it's best done? (But surely you want it done well, safely and cost-effectively) On the other hand, the "critical" decision making (war, peace, migration, alliance, famine, epidemic) requires broad consultation and buy-in. Otherwise no one would volunteer or co-operate, spelling failure of whatever venture.
The current unravelling of the EU experiment raises serious questions about the ideal political, social, and economic organization of neighboring "tribes" of various sizes, histories and past experiences with each other.
Tribalism in Europe has been totally discredited again and again (most recently Kosovo and the sad Balkins breakup) yet Europeans of various tribal origins have
what?, to galvanize around: standards of living, security, comfort and protection. Is that good government? Yes .... but ... when you wake up with the wolf in the compound, somebody, somewhere who was responsible for keeping the wolf in check .... screwed the pooch. Good government ...?
When two companies enter into a binding contract - if it's a good one - there is built-in accountability (costs, delivery dates, disclosures etc). Yet such a contract is not democratic - and not necessarily between two equals - yet accountability can be provided.
So I ask again: Is it possible to have GOOD government that is NOT Democratic Government.
MM