Each definition of democracy has its week points. It is not about freedom of speech. Just open your today newspaper and look, who is apologizing for some words or statements or explaining that interpretation of the ones were incorrect. It is not about of freedom of travel. Cuba is still prohibited for American citizen, while open for Canada and Europe. It is not about free and fair elections – in US the small parties don’t have any chances to be represented in the United States Congress. And any efforts to explain it by people preferences or traditions will have the same type of the reasoning as in any country where dictator is the head of state.
Does the head of your family like to make all decisions by majority vote or always easy accept critical statements? I guess, not. Why we should apply to the whole society rules that don’t work for the family?In current common sense democracy is about levels of practical limitation for the government to deal with its single citizen. It is not a secret that most governments can do anything with any individual and show it from time to time. But we’re talking how high or low those limitations are and how often and easy power exceed those limitations. Any protection of freedoms has its boundaries. They defined by very small group of government related entities. The same powerful people are creating the law, making interpretation or enforce it. And any parliamentary democracy can easily migrate to dictatorship, as Germany did in 1930’s. This is the reality of our life and we have to deal with it.Purpose of this post is not to discuss the definitions and glory past of democracy or finding stains, which by the way are very big and dirty, on its banner. It is more about what can we expect from the future. Let’s compare western democracy to China of the beginning of the 21st century. The only major difference in terms of the people rights and freedoms – you cannot criticize the government or vote against it. You can travel, exchange information, made business and your own decision about future life, if it does not contradict to interests of the Chinese government. Please, don’t forget that China is the example of the country, where for few thousand years (with very small exceptions for revolutions or war for less then 0.5 of percent of time) government was always right by definition. So why change the traditions? Western mentality for last few hundred years not just introduced, but also follows the very controversial practice, when you publicly show your disrespect to the government and its decisions, but still obey them. Most of the world would not able to follow this practice. Many countries like Russia, Japan and India are playing this game with national accent. It is not natural to them either, but it will continue while the ‘free’ world has the power. And all efforts to promote democracy as universal society therapy will cause only really big headaches.Let’s talk about United States. White men of Western European descent had introduced democracy using very nice words. We remember them by heart – “All [white] men are created equal”. Only many-many years later they included women and just recently other races to the definition. Now the life is beautiful. But soon all those nice white men will become minority. Will they keep the rules of the game? First, just assume, that they will. Major issue in this case is the cultural and financial level of the potential majority. It is not question of preferences or good or poor judgment. It is just question of the demographic changes, birth rates, prices of education and medicine. This means that discrepancy between white minority and remaining majority will grow by definition. The current trend of the big business just to keep management and top service in US and outsource all other work but receiving the money helps to speed up this process. Majority from the other side would like to have profit sharing. It just will take some time when they able to create, promote and vote for the new leader. The one who tell them, what they want to hear. And then put it in the law and everyday practice. If you think that elected officials are too smart for that, please don’t forget that most important task for them is being elected, not being smart. This vision of the future is not too negative. The one of the common definitions of democracy is “majority rules”. “Minority Rights” can be easily changed to Lefts – just look from other point of view. So in this scenario approximately in 2070 descendants of the Founding Fathers will completely loose their leadership.Based on this assessment current white majority clearly understands that some actions should be taken to stop and reverse the process, if they would like to pass the power to their children and grandchildren. They realized or will realize soon, that there is the only one realistic and peaceful option. Switch from democracy to aristocracy while keeping very significant rights of the regular people. Social Elite in this case may be defined mostly by the income and may include very significant (20-30%) part of the society. This process can be started by repealing twenty–fourth Amendment. It will put back income tax requirements for the people who able to vote and being elected. Later limitations and laws will enforce status of the elite. Interestingly enough it will not cause big political problem, as you may expect. For the most people there are more important things in life then making wrong decisions about their next senators or president. This is in assumption that government can still keep the big level of personal freedom and reasonable prosperity. See China remarks above. Europe will go very similar way. But their definition of aristocracy will be more national and more monarchical. It is more natural, stable and cost effective to have social hierarchy with King on the top of it. Or Queen, if you prefer. Each single historic experiment with democracy ended relatively fast. But kingdoms existed for thousand years. Don’t think that we are going ‘Back to the Future’. Who will remember names of today leaders in one hundred years? Almost none. But many will still remember, who were Solomon, Elizabeth I or Catherine II. Caesar was good as well, but dictatorship tends to eliminate all people with equal to dictator potentials. Otherwise they may loose the power. And life. Kingdom gives to its sovereign very important ability – to have long-term thinking, responsibility not for abstract people – but at least for the country and his or her own children and grandchildren. Yes, some rulers will prefer pleasure to the hard work. But it is still better chance to keep civilization moving, than ‘billions opinions count’ nonsense. So Europe, including Russia will switch to ‘limited voting’ version of Constitutional Monarchy. Purpose of constitution will be to grant very reasonable personal and financial freedoms to regular people and preserve status of the elite. And those with skills will always have chance to update their status.Please understand the major difference between word “freedoms” and reality. There is no freedom of speech, if you have to say, “My children are hungry.” There is no freedom to vote, if your choices included only those who can spend at least your 400 (four hundred) yearly salaries for advertising. There is no protection for you, if government does not applied “equal legal protection” for non-citizens. You don’t need voting and democracy to fill yourself healthy, happy and respected part of society. You just need government that don’t push you too hard, don’t tax you too much, but still available when you need it. Its naming is not even secondary.
Few words about future terminology. Unlike Europe, US will still claim to be democratic country. Where just not all citizens will have ‘political responsibility’. We think that the good name for the elite – senior citizens. It is already in use, so it will be easier to accept. You can imagine all jokes in the period of the transition.
