(First of a series)
By Noralyn Dudt
“DEMOCRACY is messy, and it's hard. It's never easy,” is a famous
Kennedy quote. If you prefer that everything should be controlled and
organized, democracy would never be your choice of government. It's not neat,
it is messy, it is hard. That's because it involves everyone who wants to
participate. And all participants are human beings with brains and emotions,
and robots these mortals are not. Some are new, some are experienced, some are
rational, some are emotional. As a result, anything can happen. Democracy is
neither a neat process nor a pretty one. But surely it can be lively.
"Of the people, by the people, for the people," was how
the late U.S. President Abraham Lincoln described how democracy works. A lofty
concept it was, and still is. I ponder
the word and it looks almost “menacing” because one wonders how it could be
attained by human beings who can be irrational, emotional, and inexperienced. Human beings who can be greedy,
power-hungry, and who may have the "my way or the highway" mentality.
The word "democracy" has Greek origins—"demos"
meaning people, and "kratos" meaning power. Combine them and you have
"power of the people." It's a
method of governing which depends on the will of the people. WE the People have the power to participate
in decision-making, important decisions that affect our daily lives.
When the nations of Europe were still ruled by kings and queens,
the 13 English colonies in the East
Coast of what is now the United States of America decided to break away from a
king who had reigned over them from across the Atlantic. They declared their
independence by drafting a Constitution and fighting back when the king sent
his troops to quell their rebellion. Except for Benjamin Franklin who was 70
years old at the time, this brave group of men were young, in their late 20s
and mid-30s.They pledged their honor and their lives to form a "more
perfect Union". Such lofty ideals from mere mortal beings. As they were
human and imperfect, each had his own "flaws and failings". Thomas
Jefferson made the point in the very first line of the Declaration of
Independence: "When in the course
of human events…." The key word is
human. The miracle was, that these imperfect mortals could so rise to the
occasion, that such noble ideals and
brilliant political leadership came to the fore as they did, that so few could,
in the end accomplished so much for humankind. The signers of the Declaration
of Independence were not gods. Indeed, had they been, they would deserve less
honor and respect. Gods, after all, can do largely as they please.
So, did it work? Let's take a look at America's beginnings.
George Washington, the first president of this new Union served two terms. When
his second term was about to end, his constituents actually asked him to
"continue being our president forever". I am paraphrasing here.
"You are our king" they said. Washington was incredulous. "What
did we fight for?" he reminded them.
"Didn't we fight and pledge our lives to break free from the rule
of kings forever?" Washington retired and went to live a quiet life in
Mount Vernon, his farm in Virginia just several miles from the new capital
Washington DC. Countries in Europe like France took notice of the new republic,
and wondered what it would be like to be a country without a king. Even though
this concept originated in ancient Greece centuries before, it was quite novel
for their world at the time. The United States of America inspired the French
to break away from their king as well, though theirs was a very bloody
one. Liberte,
Egalite Fraternite (Liberty, Equality, Fraternity) was the outcome of the
French Revolution. France having guillotined her king became a democracy.
A little over a century later, in 1898, this exemplary and
bastion of democracy, the United States of America took over a small nation
across the vast Pacific Ocean that was just breaking free from her Spanish
colonial masters. The Philippines was supposed to be America's showcase for
democracy in Asia. America was going to show Asia and the rest of the world
that American democracy was the path to progress.
Public education, elections, free press are all key elements of a
democratic society. Educated and informed citizens are better equipped when participating to elect a qualified individual
to represent them in the decision making that affect the quality of daily
life. A free press without bias would
keep the government institutions in check.
The Philippines had all those—an election where the citizenry could
choose their national and local officials; public education that was modeled
after the United States; a free press
that had all the elements of... well... being free. All of these were clearly present from 1946
when the country finally gained her independence from the United States. What
happened to the Philippine "democracy" that was set up in 1946? Just
26 years later in 1972, then President Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. declared Martial
Law, a step I believed necessary at the time. To have a clearer view, it is
necessary that we look back and clarify what harbingers of martial law they were?
Did those democratic elements that were established no longer worked? Was the
democracy set up by the United States
turned out to be half-baked? Did these democratic ideals clash with Filipino
cultural norms? Was there so much chaos and lawlessness that democratic
institutions could no longer function effectively?
The EIU ( Economic Intelligence Unit), a private think tank based
in London conducts inspections and observations on how countries practice these
ideals and designates scores between 0 and 10. Scores are classified into six
categories: electoral process and pluralism, functioning government, political
participation, political culture, and civil liberties. According to the EIU's
democracy 2020 index, the Philippines recorded an average 6.56. It
scored 9.17 in electoral process and pluralism which is significantly high; 5
in functioning government which is on the medium side; 7.78 in political participation which is
moderately good; 4.38 in political culture which is considerably low; and 6.47
in civil liberties. Altogether, the EIU concluded that the Philippines is among
those described as having "flawed democracies"—those that "have
free and fair elections," where basic liberties are respected but with
minor infringement on free press.
So… does democracy work?
Looking at the EIU ratings, it does work in some places. Norway,
Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Canada, New Zealand, Iceland, Australia, Switzerland, Germany, the Netherlands are
among the top. What do these countries have in common? Are their citizens more disciplined in fulfilling their civic duties? Do they have a higher level of desire to work
and contribute for the common good? Are they more united in promoting what
works best? Is their government more in
tune to the people's needs? Does
democracy work for them because there's mutual trust between those who are governing and those who are
governed? (This is to be discussed
further in the next series)
In Deutsch (the German language), the word "Gemeinde"
means local community. It literally means "of one mind. " Call it
esprit de corps, team spirit, and yes... Filipino bayanihan. That's one of the ways democracy
can succeed. It's team effort, it's work in progress. It's not something that
happens automatically. It's a continuing process—it needs to be worked on,
maintained, and guarded. It's never easy... and it can be messy. It will die
when those governing and those they governed become "disconnected"
and no longer work together. A utopian concept, it truly is. But countries have
proven that it can work when good dynamics come together—a disciplined
citizenry and government officials dedicated to serving the people who placed
them there.
(Noralyn Onto Dudt
considers herself fortunate to have not only read about these matters in books
but also have had many opportunities to have discussed them with a diverse
group of people from all over the world in a community in the U.S. capital
where she has been a resident for the last 50 years.
She conveys her
appreciation to members of her chat group, fellow Bataqueños Dr. Don Rubio, Atty. Nestor Corpuz, Batac
councilor Ibarra Franco Crisostomo and Atty. Marylin Acosta-Aguinaldo who have
shared their ideas with her.)
Comments
Post a Comment