Democracy doesn’t work. It’s still the best we got!

Democracy isn't a new concept to human beings. We have been practicing some form of democracy since ancient Greece. The Greeks had a pretty good system that resembles modern day democracy. As a matter of fact, many argue that it's the Greeks from whom we took the concept of democracy from and modernised it. However, what we fail to recognise is that throughout history democracy there were never really an attempt to bring equity to the people. I don't want to go into the economic systems of nations through which democracy may operate, although that discussion is going to come up, I rather argue that democracy fails because we run it like authoritarianism. That is to say countries like The US might look like they have a strong democracy but it is essentially authoritarianism bottled with the label of people's will AKA democracy.

Let's step back for a bit and try and understand how people's will work. Essentially a  system is called democratic when the people are able to express their will. Yes, I am summarising for the same of argument, but this is the essence of democracy. The most common way for people to express their will is through voting and choosing people to be there leaders and policymakers. In some countries there are exceptions where people choose the policies directly themselves as well as the leaders, like Switzerland. As this selection of rulers or policymakers is done through voting where each and every person has a vote that they can cast to choose the leaders of their liking. This is where things get tangly.

Since the birth of democracy, ancient Greece inclusive, there has always been a segregation of the population in some form or another. A segregation in which only a class of citizens were allowed to vote. In ancient Greece only citizens were allowed to vote. Here citizens meant the elite class of the society, which for the record did not even include women. In much modern times these definitions of who are allowed to vote have changed. Although the concept of the “citizen” have broadened to females and have become more inclusive, I argue that it is not inclusive enough even today and it is by design. The reason why I say democracy doesn't work is because it is designed poorly.

So why do I say that democracy isn't inclusive enough? Yes, everyone has a vote if you're 18 years or older you are allowed to vote no matter what your gender is, religious believes are. If you're a citizen of a country you are allowed to vote. That's it. Generally speaking, this is a brilliant idea that you're allowed to choose your own leaders. The people's voice can be heard through the means of elections and voting. I agree with all that but I'm asking the fundamental question of what it means to be a citizen itself. If we are enforcing a threshold to which you have to cross in order to vote, as in the case of being 18 years and older, why do we not have other thresholds? Especially educational. Why do we assume that a person who has not even passed high school is equal in terms of knowledge, understanding of the world and critical thinking capacity is equal as a person who has a PhD? Why is it that we have given everyone the ability to choose their leaders, something that is incredibly consequential, not only for the citizens of that given country, but potentially the whole planet. Take the example of the US. Someone who can barely comprehend basic instructions have the ability to vote for a leader who has that ability to decide the livelihood of billions of people around the world! I am not against taking away liberties of people on the basis of education or any other factor, rather I am trying to say that in a true democratic society education would be designed in such a way that everyone has the basic tools in understandingthe world by which they can participate actively in democracy.

What do I really mean when I say education needs to be redesigned? Is it not adequate around the world? How can I say that the educational system of certain countries like Canada for example is not adequate for people to be the best judge of their leaders? Or even in other countries where democracy see has successfully flourished? I'm not questioning the educational materials but how it's designed. If I if you ask me if Canada's educational design is flawed, then yes, I admit that the educational design is flawed. When I say the design is flawed, I mean the system from early childhood education to university level that carries people through its system. In most parts of the world the educational system is designed in such a way that it produces mindless workers as Marx would argue. Have we really invested in creating a population who are critical thinkers? We have not, and this is where we I argue that it is by design that democratic societies refrain from creating a better education system where people would be critical thinkers. This is where the loophole is. This is the loophole that the people in power use to be re elected continuously.

When you have a certain population who are not educated, and by not educating I mean people who are not critical thinkers, would inevidently choose policies that are populist. This is a classic example of how someone like Donald Trump became president not only once, but twice. He attracted a population in his country who were frustrated about different things from the past. Be it immigration or other policies like starting wars. Trump, instead of providing a new vision of the world, took on an extreme right view to appease a population who are not as critical thinkers so that they would vote for him. He didn’t have to do a lot to win, really. Just threw out some populist ideas, and they stuck. Because of one reason- the voter based lacked critical thinking abilities. As I mentioned before, this is by design. The US educational system is one of the worst in the world- which is widely accepted by the world at this point. This flawed fragile educational system has given rise to the 2-party system that are not really varied much in their ideologies, if you think about it. A professor once said that the difference between the two American parties is the difference between Coca-Cola and Pepsi. They are essentially the same with different branding. Nothing else. Think about it: when you have a population who are unable to think for themselves and on top of that you have two parties that are very similar in nature, in terms of their policies, you evidently get authoritarianism, and that is what the US is in reality. This is the reason why you do not have new parties as there is no appetite in the population to entertain a different way of seeing the world. This is also the same reason why someone as popular as Ted Cruz who rose up from this very democratic system doesn't know what the population of Iran is, a country that he plans to invade. This shows how democracy can be kidnapped into being an authoritarian system and still have the outlook of a genuine democratic system.

Now why do I say that the US is an authoritarian society? In reality it's not. Let's be honest it's not an authoritarian society, but it sure acts like one. Why do I say this? Because there is a natural low tolerance for new ideas to be brought in. For example, gun control. Is it possible for someone to run for presidency with the mandate that they are going to limit gun control? Absolutely not. This is where the argument meets capitalism. Concepts like gun control, or not meddling in other country’s internal affairs, will never ever disappear from the US political scene. Why? Because it's controlled by capital. There is a fundamental need for capital to have policies in place that ensures their profit. Therefore, politicians merely carryout the will of capital in there day to day business. Because they are serving the capital which is represented by billionaires and corporations. The politicians, therefore, do not have the general people's well-being in mind.

Then how do they get elected if they do not implement policies for the betterment of the people? This is where I go back to my idea that people cannot think for themselves. Despite being betrayed numerous times by the politician elites of the nation, people continue to vote and participate in democracy. The only logical explanation is the missing link of education, as education is not well crafted and well designed, we do not get a population that is aware of the world and can look for alternatives within the political spectrum. Take any country in the world that has active democratic system of representation. You will always find a class of citizen there are not well informed and has low levels of education along with an established capitalistic entity that constantly pushes out narratives that are not favorable for the public. The general population falls for it, and the cycle continues. This is the reason why I say democracy does not work.

What is the solution? The solution is very simple, but it would take years to undo what has been done already. Remember how the state and the church separated itself? My proposition is that capital and statecraft separate itself. Only then we will see politicians bring up policies and conversations that are actually beneficial to its people. At the same time the state should ensure that a fresh educational system is implemented that would gradually change the demographics of a population to a much more educated critical thinking one. Once that is done, we will find that there are more ideas more conversations flowing through the fabric of society that will bring about changes in the planet as a whole. A society that is not afraid to speak about equality, equity or genuine freedom will definitely flourish. The reason why The Renaissance happened is primarily because society, led by artists who were thinkers themselves, started expanding their ideas despite the oppression of the church. This time around we will have to stand against political elites who are in hands and hands with capital.

We're not there yet. There is a very good chance we will never be there. Throughout known history, power always belonged to an elite class. It was the kings and Queens who ruled in the olden times, where the average person in the kingdoms had no say in the states policy. I ask, are we very much different from those times with democracy? Do we genuinely have a say in the statecraft of a nation? This is why I say democracy doesn't work but it's still the best system we got. The only way where we, as the citizens of any given country, can make a difference for ourselves. However, we will never find our true voice within the current system of democracy. It is too polluted with capital. The current system ensures that the population can never truly have a choice through their voting rights by making the population less aware of themselves by means of curtailing education. As a result, we have long way to go before we get true, inclusive, equitable democracy on this planet!