Democracy on trial...



A very interesting interview with Professor Michael Hudson. Quite relevant to any discussion about why the system doesn’t work.

#23 … d&ir=World


Democracy is frail and will always be on trial - I think what people fail to realize is how easily democracy can be corrupted to the extreme. The Italian soccer fascist above is just a small example of how seemingly rational people can lose the plot. Unfortunately, the attacks to democracy are not limited to shouting politicians these days, it seems that economics and especially central bank and sovereign finances are playing a much greater role than they should. Let’s not forget the Weimer Republic preceded the Nazis … 059272755/

"Nazi leader Hermann Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during
the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trials, 1946 April 18, quoted in
Gilbert’s book ‘Nuremberg Diary.’

Goering: Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some
poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that
he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece.

Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia, nor in
England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is
understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who
determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the
people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or
a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some
say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the
United States only Congress can declare wars.

Goering: Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in
any country."


It was interesting to hear Clare Daly and Michael Ring discussing on PK this morning with Myles Dungan how we should treat democratically elected people.

Ring made the point - and I think it reflects on the kind of governance we’ve had since FG came into power - that the Irish government had no right to exercise any critical voice against Obama. That it’s not our job to hold any democratically elected person to account. Daly minced his arguments, which were pathetic. But Ring’s approach crystallized the hazy logic behind a whole lot of fuzzy things that have been happening since FG came to power: that because they have a democratic mandate, they can say and do as they please - including abolishing the Seanad and replacing it with a system not unlike one the nation rejected in a referendum. It’s a fascinating example of democracy paving the way for autocracy.



How do you counter (maybe you don’t feel the need to) the arguments which I’m sure you hear, that people died so you could have the vote so many oppressed persons don’t have?