Martin Wolf argues in the FT this morning that there are four condition for democracy. They are, he says, citizens committed to the process; guardians committed to defending democracy including opposition politicians; free and open markets and, lastly, the rule of law. I am surprised that he did not refer to a free press, but I suspect that they fall into his category of guardians of democracy. This apart, I think his analysis powerful and appropriate.
There is, however, a problem, and I think that Martin Wolf knows this. Within neoliberal systems, and within the states that the neoliberal system has promoted, including Russia, these conditions either do not exist or they are being progressively undermined.
We do not, for example, have free and open markets. The tax haven systems of the world are designed to undermine such markets, just as they are designed to undermine the concept of citizenship by removing many from the obligations of the states in which they either reside or trade or make their income.
The concept of citizenship is also under attack: there are those who now say that unless a person pays tax they should not have the right to vote. It is, I agree, a minority view, but one that would not have been heard very long ago.
And, as for the guardians, as I argued in The Courageous State, politicians of all the major parties in the UK have been committed to the idea that government is necessarily dysfunctional and that markets and competition provide the answer to all economic allocation problems. That is clear indication of their failure to act as guardians of democracy when it is very obvious that the state has, as one of its functions, to correct the externalities that markets create.
As for the rule of law, our lawyers in this country are on strike on Friday because of the denial of justice to too many on the basis of their inability to pay, a process that inevitably undermines the rule of law by creating inequality in access to justice.
Martin Wolf wrote about the creation of democracy in Ukraine. That would be a good outcome for the current crisis in that country. I would welcome it. But, equally, I look forward to the guardians of democracy standing up for it in this country, and do so, too often, in despair rather than any realistic hope.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Unfortunately, Ukraine has become a pawn in the neoliberal battle; on the one hand we have kerry offering neo-lib lollipops of funding and on the other gazprom (oligarchic/kleptocratic power) threatening to cut off supplies if the Ukrainian Government (?) does not toe the Russian line. It seems clear also that the West might be turning a blind eye to neo-fascist elements in the ‘popular’ uprising.
In these areas the War is a stronger memory than here, however,I don’t believe it is an echo of the ‘cold war’, rather two oligarchies, undemocratic in their own ways, going head to head.
To quote a recent FT letter: “There have been frequent reports about the number of billionaires in Ukraine, one of whom alone is said to be worth more than $15bn.” So more than 2 oligarchies… Relevant, I think, to Ivan Horrocks’ comment: “But I’d argue that of equal — or quite likely more importance — is the global, highly networked relations between the 1% (the elites) of the nations of the world.”
“As the population becomes more informed, governments that treat their peoples in this way will be less acceptable.”
I disagree – in the UK we have population that is poorly informed, hoodwinked, dumbed down, fed myths about money and treated like the proverbial mushroom. How Wolf might mix with the ‘informed’ but ii hardly a general truth. When Universities are feeding students lies about the workings of the economy how can this be true?
You may well be right: Wolf might be mistaking his own informed opinion and that of his friends and acquaintances with a broader population, and that may not be wise
You are right to be as much concerned about democracy in this country as in the Ukraine, Richard. Indeed, I’d argue that the Ukrainian issue – or more specifically the West’s reaction to it – has brought into open sight the true extent of the power, influence and reach of the 1%, and of those whose primary purpose is the promotion and protection of those people and their interests.
Nothing could signify that more than the detail of the briefing note/outline policy paper photographed earlier in the week being carried by a UK civil servant. That demonstrated beyond any doubt that whatever the rhetoric on sanctions and so on, in practice nothing that would in any way impact on the City (or we might say London more generally, given the number of Russians who reside there, and the 1%) would be considered. I know that position was qualified by ‘at this point’ but I seriously doubt that anything would have changed even if a wider invasion had taken place.
Much has been made of the global nature of trade – the level of exports and imports between Russia and EU countries – and thus the interconnectedness of states, being a barrier or impediment to action against Russia. That’s true, of course (witness the Russian Parliament debating tit-for-tat sanctions and measures to be taken against the West). But I’d argue that of equal – or quite likely more importance – is the global, highly networked relations between the 1% (the elites) of the nations of the world.
In terms of economic, cultural and social interests, these elites nowadays have much more in common than different classes, nationalities, or ethnic groups. And the preservation of their wealth, privilege, interests, and persons, is of far greater importance to them and their supporters (e.g. the UK government), than any democracy will ever be. I’m afraid that is why I now take the view that democracy as currently practiced in most – perhaps all – countries is nothing more than a manufactured illusion, maintained to provide a veneer of legitimacy to governments, and cover to the elite/corporate puppet masters who really control policy, actions, and events. Sadly, it just so happens that the UK has become a world leader in ‘sham democracy’.
Depressingly, I have to agree with you
I think I agree, Ivan, with most of this albeit difficult to quantify as the elites operate as out of sight as possible.
One factor which has had little airing about the Ukraine is the historical legacy. The Ukraine famine of 1932/33 killed (estimates vary )between 2.5 and 7.5 million people. The higher figure is more than the Holocaust. It was the result of the policy of collectivization of agriculture and people were left to die of starvation. Foreign aid was turned back. I would not wish to propose a hierarchy of suffering but I would rather be gassed than die of starvation or watch the family die in this way. Some Russians died as well and to call it a genocide may not be accurate in historical terms but the Ukrainian govt. in 2006 declared it was, and would not have been able to do so unless many felt that way. What people feel is true is often of more influence than what is true. It is why some Ukrainians fought with the Nazis (who they were against rather than being for National Socialism) and why some of the groups there now are regarded as neo-Nazi.
Nationalism has been a root cause of the two world wars and is easily aroused. Nationalism and scapegoating generally suits some of the elites as a way of raising emotional support for them. To my mind UKIP is a way of diverting attention from the real hemorrhage of power from the people Viz. corporate capture and privatisation of state assets.
We need those guardians of democracy as much as in the 1930s.
“It is why some Ukrainians fought with the Nazis (who they were against rather than being for National Socialism) and why some of the groups there now are regarded as neo-Nazi.”
Come again? I think the likes of Stephen Bandera were very much in favour of the nazi’s.
And despite the western media shamefully trying to distort events, Kiev has effectively been taken over by a violent coup mainly organised by neo-nazi groups.
This has the US’ fingerprints all over it! Their meddling has caused this.
The West’s hypocrisy is sickening!
I do not think the whole new government meets your description but there are worrying elements to it
I may be wrong
“I do not think the whole new government meets your description but there are worrying elements to it
I may be wrong”
It is that element that appears to be mainly calling the shots, Richard. There is also strong evidence of US meddling in all of this.
There needs to be fresh elections organised as soon as possible with the agreement of everyone concerned. There should be no truck with a putsch This could turn into civil war or maybe worse.
I entirely agree with the need for new elections
Indeed Stevo -Ukraine has a sad history of Anti-Semitism and the posters of war time fascist sympathisers were very visible-with racism and anti-semitism on the rise in other European countries I find the scenario in the Ukraine very disturbing -America, of course, has a record of supporting fascism and its corporate sponsors!
Just a small point… when I was younger I knew Ukrainians who had fought with Bandera. They had been village boys united in a common cause against Stalin’s cruel and oppressive occupation. 10 million Ukrainians were starved to death and many tens of thousands murdered in Stalin’s purges. Nazi Germany offered salvation in their struggle against Soviet tyranny. They knew little about Hitler or National Socialism.
Yes, there was anti-Semitism in Ukraine, but I’ll think you will find that was pretty much the default position in Europe at the time. Hungary, Romania and Czechoslovakia all provided regiments to Hitler, many linked to some of the worst atrocities of the war. Jewish people were persecuted in every country in Europe, including our own. Let’s not forget that Vichy France was fascist and more importantly, if large swathes of our own aristocracy (and certain daily newspapers) had had their way, we would have been fighting with Germany, not against them.
It is a mistake to decontextualise people like Bandera, and then seek some sort of continuity with the far right in Ukraine today, as if this somehow speaks to the Ukrainian national character. The rise of the neo-Nazi groups in Eastern Europe is related far more closely to the sickly and failing economies of 1980’s Soviet bloc.
Fascism gives a voice to the voiceless, under-educated masses. Impotence is a very dangerous condition. What vestiges of democracy remain in this country are under daily assault (witness the gagging law, moves to introduce water cannon, police infiltration of lawful protest groups, and the rest). Politicians (of all political colours)are increasingly distanced and alien to the people they purport to represent. One thing that was clear when Timoschenko addressed the Maidan on her release was the lukewarm reaction of the crowd. What was obvious was that whatever it was that the people wanted, she wasn’t it. Ukrainians were united by a desire for government ‘of the people, by the people, for the people’.
Commentators in this country frequently mistake (or misrepresent) voter disaffection for apathy. The powerlessness that our electorate feel on a daily basis when no-one in fact speaks for them is a dangerous thing. I am no longer convinced that our middle-class, Oxbridge educated labour party can step in to fill the void. But that void will be filled, probably by the wrong people. And that is a real threat to democracy.
Re you last point: indeed
“It is a mistake to decontextualise people like Bandera, and then seek some sort of continuity with the far right in Ukraine today, as if this somehow speaks to the Ukrainian national character. The rise of the neo-Nazi groups in Eastern Europe is related far more closely to the sickly and failing economies of 1980′s Soviet bloc. Fascism gives a voice to the voiceless, under-educated masses.”
I am not “decontextualising” people like Bandera. There are clear links to Bandera and the neo-naxi’s that organised a coup.
I don’t know if this is a point you are deliberately ignoring, but a democratically elected, if corrupt government, was overthrown. Overthrown with the help of some decidedly unpleasant people. This seems to matter little to the news media in the west and, as such, their hypocrisy sickles me!
The uprising in the Crimea is largely because of this. Many in the Crimea are of Russian descent and Kiev has been taken over in large part by people who are rabidly anti-Russian.
There is plain evidence that there has been US meddling in all this. It seems the West will consort with anyone no matter how repugnant in order to achieve its aims!
They are mostly to blame for this, not Russia!
Ivan is correct – our government’s rhetoric is shallow and largely predictable. Huffington post report the blatancy of this contradiction “Britain Sells £86m Of Arms To Russia And Still Has 271 Export [weapons] Licences, Despite Crimea Crisis”, link below. Alignment of the interests of governing elites is much closer than that to its constituency. It is paradoxical that the freedoms promised by the internet age have been used most successfully to drive on the neo-liberal project to greater dominance, by dispersal of misinformation, confusion, overload and chaos and deployment of IT’s technical capabilities to transfer wealth to the deserving “creators” on an unbelievable scale. Tony Blair (a self professed computer illiterate) understood this early on and proclaimed so the importance of the penetration of computer and internet access throughout the UK. Blair’s commitment to drive internet access coincides with GCHQ, NSA et al desire to trawl ever wider, their business is both politics and commerce. Information so gathered gives the analytics necessary for modern government to drive their [covert] agenda, further undermining democracy. Parliament is then [only] necessary to legitimise the process — something not lost on Putin. G8 meetings would of course be necessary to learn and adapt their rival Orwellian systems —with bragging rights. The legitimate “creators” of democracy, government and money are us but we are told the opposite! What is so different between Putin and Cameron?
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/05/russia-arms-trade_n_4901787.html?1394014948&utm_hp_ref=uk
Depressingly many of the arms to be shipped to Russia by Britain were stated to be [state-of-the-art] sniper rifles.
One speaks Russian and I assume the other does not, Tony_B.
But seriously, I made much the same point some months ago when Cameron was on his trade mission to China. Presumably before he went his officials made clear to the Chinese that Cameron would have to say something about human rights abuses – given that he comes from a country where human rights are respected (?). And if truth be known the Chinese probably signed off on that.
But beyond that – and as we now see with the empty rhetoric over Ukraine – Cameron and our governing/corporate elite know, as do their opposite numbers in China, Russia, Malaysia, Australia, USA and so on, exactly what their priorities are and where their allegiance lies.
The concept of citizenship is also under attack: there are those who now say that unless a person pays tax they should not have the right to vote. It is, I agree, a minority view, but one that would not have been heard very long ago.
It’s a distortion of a very healthy view: namely, that those who have no representation should be free from taxation. The Jersey authorities for one should take heed.
Indeed James- there is a broadening of the neo-liberal dogma that unless you are part of their wealth syphoning scam you are a none person. Witness over 900,000 people ‘sanctioned’ and deprived of basic benefits on one year and people in part time work under threat of sanctions if they don’t increase their hours.
“When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing; when you see that money is flowing to those who deal not in goods, but in favors; when you see that men get rich more easily by graft than by work, and your laws no longer protect you against them, but protect them against you, you may know that your society is doomed.”
– Ayn Rand
CVN 77, George W Bush, a nuclear powered and nuclear armed carrier has just passed into the Bosphorus. No word on its support group, but they usually travel together.
Why is this familiar…oh yes, WW1 and WW2…..
Strange how Ayn rand is used as a neo-lib’s bible and also the critique of it!
¨We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force¨
¨The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws¨
Stevo.
I am a bit confused by your logic-
“…a democratically elected, if corrupt, government was overthrown”
Do democratic elections somehow legitimise a corrupt administration? Was corruption a manifesto promise in Yanuschenko’s election campaign? Did Ukrainians knowingly vote for corruption?
A political rainbow of activists from (yes) the far right hooligan element to woman’s rights group FEMEN have been protesting against the Ukrainian president for years. Any vestiges of Yanukovic legitimacy disappeared when Berkut snipers opened fire on unarmed civilians.
The world is full of dictators, many of whom were, initially, ‘democratically elected’, before manipulating the instruments of control to create their autocracy. They all point to their ‘democratic election’ as justification for their actions (witness Belarus, Turkey, Egypt etc. etc…).
As Richard’s original post pointed out we are witnessing it’s nascence here in the UK. Theresa May’s stated intention of withdrawing from the court of Human Rights, the gagging law, the Transatlantic Trade Agreement, the adoption of water cannon for use against political dissenters, and the potential removal of the franchise from those who do not pay tax are all repressive measures being introduced by our own (democratically elected) government.
I am no supporter of US foreign policy but it seems to me that vilifying America without any concrete evidence whilst in the same breath excusing Putin (‘they are mostly to blame, not Russia’) is a bit of a leap. Ask the Greenpeace activists… ask Pussy Riot… ask gay Russians how they feel about Mr Putin. And where, exactly, are the ‘burning churches’ the Russian president described in his statement to the Russian people?
Russia’s invasion of Crimea has stirred up racial tensions in Eastern Ukraine, the consequences of which may well be brutal and far-reaching. I worry deeply for the 40% of non-Russians in the peninsula, and their future.
“Stevo. I am a bit confused by your logic- “…a democratically elected, if corrupt, government was overthrown” Do democratic elections somehow legitimise a corrupt administration? Was corruption a manifesto promise in Yanuschenko’s election campaign? Did Ukrainians knowingly vote for corruption?”
OK..this is obviously going to turn into a pointless back and forth slanging match, so I will make this my last comment on this matter.
My logic is confused? British governments past and present have been up to their eyed in corruption, but (most of them) were elected with the majority of the people. Does their corruption justify a violent coup? No, it doesn’t! You peacefully protest and demonstrate and then oust them through democratic elections.
“Ukrainian president for years. Any vestiges of Yanukovic legitimacy disappeared when Berkut snipers opened fire on unarmed civilians.”
That is a distortion that is rapidly becoming unstuck! There is evidence to suggest that the shots may well have come from the so-called demonstrators. Propaganda? It is possible, but the west is conveniently ignoring this line.
“They all point to their ‘democratic election’ as justification for their actions (witness Belarus, Turkey, Egypt etc. etc…).”
Yanukovic was elected in free and fair elections. Sorry if that spoils your narrative.
“As Richard’s original post pointed out we are witnessing it’s nascence here in the UK. Theresa May’s stated intention of withdrawing from the court of Human Rights, the gagging law, the Transatlantic Trade Agreement, the adoption of water cannon for use against political dissenters, and the potential removal of the franchise from those who do not pay tax are all repressive measures being introduced by our own (democratically elected) government.”
That gives the British people the right to overthrow this government in a violent coup then? Erm – no it doesn’t!
“I am no supporter of US foreign policy but it seems to me that vilifying America without any concrete evidence whilst in the same breath excusing Putin (‘they are mostly to blame, not Russia’) is a bit of a leap”
Russia didn’t meddle in the affairs of the Ukraine – the US did. They want the EU and NATO in there and they don’t seem to mind cooperating with extreme neo-nazi groups to do it.
“Russia’s invasion of Crimea has stirred up racial tensions in Eastern Ukraine, the consequences of which may well be brutal and far-reaching. I worry deeply for the 40% of non-Russians in the peninsula, and their future.”
Nothing to do with an exremist nazi-led takeover of parliament? Demands that Russion can’t be spoken? Groups that have a psychopathic hatred of Russians? Of course not. The Russians actually have a legal agreement with the Ukraine to be in Crimea. But hey, you just continue with the one side of the story.
I won’t even go into the hypocrisy of the west’s record on illegal invasions on trumped up reasons (Iraq, Vietnam, Libya, Cambodia, et al)
It appears illegal, violent putsches are OK as long as it suits the west. I say again, sickening hypocrisy!