How not to write a democratic manifesto

“Everywhere we are ruled by the Few. Everywhere, inside and outside of formal government, the social, economic, and political decisions of the few – made in the shortsighted, self interest of the Few – shape our lives and our deaths. This is the way it has almost always been. But now, in the 21st century, as the decisions of the Few destroy the Earth, their rule is a war on Life itself. And we can find no power to stop the Few because they have hidden themselves behind the most ingenious of all disguises: the Mask of Demockracy.”

So begins the book Manifesto for Real Democracy, an independent publication credited to the pseudonym Democrates. The first passage alone makes it clear that it’s going to be a heavy-handed book – and the unfortunate use of “Demockracy” suggests that it won’t be long until “AmeriKKKa” gets a nod. But at least it’s clear that if you’re looking for a call for a watered-down version of democracy, you’re not going to find it here.

“From the early 19th century, in one country after another, the Few have tricked us with their Demockracy Fraud into believing their counterfeit ‘democracy’ is the real thing… In this way, the Ruling Few have trapped us all, everywhere, in a world of mirrors. In these so-called ‘democracies,’ when we look behind the men and women we have elected to public office, we see – not the Ruling Few who are really in control – but only our own reflections. So, it appears, we ultimately have no one to blame but ourselves for all the decisions which bring so much suffering to so many and now threaten life on Earth.

“It is a win-win situation for the Ruling Few (although, in the long run, they won’t survive either). They can either rule from behind the Mask of Demockracy, or, when their imposed ‘democracy’ makes us desperate, they can pull off the mask, step boldly forward, and generously offer their open rule – under one brand name or another – as the only alternative to the failures of democracy. The Few have, in fact, made their rule and ‘democracy’ the same thing.

The book goes on to cite polls taken in developed nations which suggest that only a minority of their citizens believe that they are “governed by the will of the people.” It cites the widespread belief that the gap between the rich and the poor is one of the world’s main problems.

“We, the people,” it therefore concludes, “know something is terribly wrong, but we – in our powerful billions – do not know exactly what. The Few and their Guardians have stolen from us the very language we need to understand what is wrong – the language which gives us the power to resist their power and rule ourselves…

“The Vision of Real Democracy that follows is a political vision that smashes the Few’s world of mirrors. It shows us that the false choice of masked rule by the Few or open Rule by the Few is not our only choice. It reminds us that, for 2,500 years, there has been an alternative. This alternative is real democracy.”

Then there are some references to Aristotle, including an insistent refutation of his idea that “oligarchy has to be added to democracy” in order to “get the best government.”

“The Few and the people can never rule together. Either the few rule or they do not. Either we, the people, rule or we do not. The choice between oligarchy and real democracy is a choice between real and incompatible alternatives. This is the most important political choice of all. Only we can choose democracy. The Few will never do it for us.”

Finally, the purpose of the book is stated to be “to reveal ‘the real truth of our lives and our societies’ by,” um…

Look, you know what? I’m just going to interrupt myself and level with you. Part of me hopes that I might get something out of this book; it seems like it’s got a lot of potential to emphasize some of the major differences between direct and representative democracies, and to offer some good advice on how to build a better, more effective system of government.

But on the other hand, my God! Look at the hyperbole! Look at all the snide puns! Count the many references to the “Ruling Few” in the first three pages alone, without so much as an attempt to identify them beyond the notion of some shadowy cabal that threatens our very survival!

But worst and most unfortunate of all is the attitude, so common to books of this type, that this is the book that will reveal “the real truth” about the world to the masses. It’s especially damning in the case of a democratic manifesto like this, because it patronizes its readers even as it preaches their power to rule themselves. Inevitably, it will compel a lot of readers to exercise their self-rule by putting the book down in favour of something more engaging and grounded.

I’m not going to do that. For better or worse, I’m going to give this book a chance. I’m judging it early, and I’m judging it harshly, and it’s not for me to say that there isn’t going to be some seriously worthwhile reading in the pages that follow. Calls for better government, and the very real issues and imbalances that those proposals tend to deal with, deserve to be read and shared – or at the very least, be given the benefit of the doubt.

But I’m proceeding with caution, because I think we’ve all read enough versions of this book – or pamphlet, or email communique, or alternative student newspaper that you wouldn’t even know existed if they hadn’t just run an issue with the principal Photoshopped to look like Hitler on the cover – to know how counterproductive and awful it can get.

For the record, the book intends to reveal “the real truth” by illustrating “how we are ruled by the Few in the three classic models of oligarchy; how the Few’s Demockracy Fraud stops us from ruling ourselves; how each and all of us can rule in the open, revolving Circle of Democracy; and how to make real democracy a reality in the 21st century.”

If there’s some genuine substance behind the rhetoric and terminology that are sure to follow, then we might really learn something. And if we end up learning by debunking a bunch of hamfisted conspiracies theories instead, then that’s not so bad, right?

Posted in Democracy