Deconstructing Democracy

No term is more connected with the nowadays global freedom efforts. Wether as desirable aim of the civilizations revolting against their totalitarian rulerships or as demand of a new definition in those nations which have implemented it for some generations more or less successful in their social structure.

Thereby democracy is from all ideological forms of government the most open and at the same time the most fragile way of political cohabiting. Open because it needs from the beginning more than one single approach of organized togetherness to give a platform for dialog and debate. Fragile because it can be turned in its counterpart, the monocracy, through calculated infiltration, serving only as appearance.

Todays democracy seems for many citizens too complicated to analyze in a few sentences. Coalitions here, practical constraints there, and, most of all, interests. If a democratic president claims himself to be the first servant of the people many may shake their heads mumbling words like 'hypocrisy' and 'lobbyism'. And if the candidate of another party underlines his empathy for the people's demands the supporters of the other fractions raise their arms shouting 'populism', if they're right or not.

So far the situation modern Western societies are dealing with. Sounds not confident at all. The reason why more and more concerned citizen have taken their destiny in their own hands founding NGO's to discuss the future of modern democracy without participation of elected politicians. The movements in Greece and Spain are not only social self-regulating communities, they have become a serious counterpart for the ruling elites whose indecision undermined the trust in responsible policy.

But what exactly is democracy? 

After the necessary deconstruction of the current status the population remains, each individual possesses one equal voice. Subject of the democratic process is the decision-making: Questions have to be answered like 'Are we for or against it?' or 'Do we want to continue or change?' In the next step the fractions within the population - let's keep the look on only two to simplify matters - choose their representatives, usually those who are able to argue and discuss on the highest possible level with their counterparts. The debate phase begins and each fraction has not only the right to express their opinion and to convince those ones who are indecisive but also the duty to listen to arguments of the other side. After debating all pros and cons the electoral phase starts searching a simple majority, 50% + x. 

The winner of the election is now the representative of the decision made by the people. But he - or she - represents not only the major fraction. The representative we call from now on the politician serves due to the electoral decision the whole community, even those who stand in contradiction to the political decision and form an opposition. The leading politician is responsible for all individuals always being aware that a possible failure of the decision token can shift the majority percentage and bring him - or her - down.

That is my personal definition of democracy freed from the crust of todays' complexity. While the societies ruled by autocratic regimes are searching the roots of democratic consciousness from the bottom the Western nations are heading towards it from the top. A historic chance to come together at the same level.