Decay and decadence of democracy

It is not surprising that an increasing number of electors consider that democratically elected political representatives are simply puppets on a string acting on orders from their political parties, not in the common interest, but in their own interests and in the interests of the economic elites and organised special interest groups.

The lack of an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) at the federal level in Australia does nothing to allay this impression. Successive federal governments have constantly resisted calls to implement a federal ICAC despite a growing number of scandals involving federal politicians in corruption and misconduct in recent years.

According to the latest Essential Report (Jan. 2020), public support for a federal ICAC has reached an all-time high of 80%. Any further resistance from the federal government to the implementation of an ICAC could only aggravate the already heavily laden atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust surrounding federal politics and politicians.

The problem is that in a hybrid political regime of representative democracy as we have in Australia, the "representatives" consider that they dispose of a broad mandate by virtue of their popular election, to act as they deem necessary without having to consult the dêmos on specific issues. They consider that they are accountable only to their political parties for their decisions and actions.

It was the quest for freedom and equality that was the driving force for democracy as conceived by Solon and Cleisthenes in the 6th century BC in Athens. By freedom they meant that it was the people (dêmos) who have the power (kratos) to make the laws to which they accept to submit themselves. By equality they meant political equality (one man one vote).

Democracy as we conceive of it today, is, of course, quite different. The objective of modern democracy is justice. Thus, freedom is expressed as human rights, and equality includes not only political equality but also gender equality, equality of education and opportunity, decent living conditions and an equitable distribution of wealth. So how do we fare on that in Australia today?

According to the Inequality in Australia 2018 survey of the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) and the University of New South Wales:

Australia's level of income is more unequal than the OECD average, but more equal than other major English-speaking countries including the United States and United Kingdom, which have very high levels of inequality. While Australian households are wealthy by world standards and wealth is more equally shared here than in most other OECD countries, wealth inequality in Australia is increasing :

• The wealthiest 20% own nearly two thirds of all wealth, while the lowest half own just 18%

• Australia has a substantial group of people with ultra-high wealth - the fifth highest number in the world, equal with France and Canada. In 2017 there were an estimated 3,000 Australians with wealth of more than $US50 million ($A74 million).

The Poverty in Australia 2020 report found that 3.24 million people in Australia (13.6% of the population) live below the poverty line – more than one in eight adults and one in six children. The poverty line (measured as 50% of median income) is $A457 per week for a single adult.

Only a few years ago, we used to pride ourselves in thinking that Australia was an egalitarian country.

The disappointing results we observe today are the logical consequences of the way our hybrid political system of representative democracy has been designed to operate. The first to take advantage of this were those who had positioned themselves, right from the beginning, at the very heart of the system: the political parties. The rapacious economic elite and well-organised special interest groups were quick to follow suit. All three (political parties, economic elites and special interest groups) perfectly identified and understood the weakness of the system and learned how to influence and manipulate it to further their own interests, in complete impunity, under the pretext of democracy.

Our hybrid system of representative democracy has been operating far too long almost exclusively as an oligarchy. The mandate of our elected representatives should be limited to the daily run-of-the-mill matters. All major issues should be dealt with by direct democracy, via a dedicated, state-of-the-art, electronic communications network.

Modern technology could provide us with the means to vote safely and securely. It could provide us with all the necessary information on the issues we are to vote on as well as videos of debates on the issues by competent specialists. We could also exchange ideas among ourselves on appropriate forums and social media.

All this pleads in favour of our active participation in the important political decisions that affect our lives and the lives of our families, friends and fellow Australians. Voting by direct democracy on issues we consider to be important is technically and economically possible.

It would be interesting to see if those who declare that they are dissatisfied with the way our democracy is working at present are prepared to devote the time and effort necessary to make it work to their satisfaction.