“Form of government in which sovereign power resides in the people as a whole, and is exercised either directly by them or by their elected representatives; State having this form of government”
“Class of people with no hereditary privileges; common people (in reference to their political power).”
For the uninitiated, the above is the Oxford English Dictionary definition for ‘Democracy’. Collins defines it thus:-
- government by the people or their elected representatives
- a political or social unit governed ultimately by all its members
- the practice or spirit of social equality
- a social condition of classlessness and equality
- the common people, esp as a political force
from French démocratie, from Late Latin dēmocratia, from Greek dēmokratia government by the people; dēmo = ‘the people + kratia = power/rule.
Why do I mention Democracy? Well, it is a very delicate and challenging subject. It is a principle which has been stretched and pulled beyond recognition.The Human Rights Act, enshrined in Law by the last Labour government, whilst good in principle, is nothing more than a complicated tool designed by Socialists to destroy democracy as we know it. However, it does raise another contentious debate. Socialism is the transitional stage between Capitalism and Communism but, then again, Communism is, by definition, a social system characterised by the absence of class and by common ownership of the means of production and subsistence. The parallels between the principles of Democracy and Communism are so close as to be almost one. The saving grace for Democracy is freedom, unfortunately, I believe, it is freedom that is being usurped. It would appear that everyone seems to think that they have the right (freedom) to have what their neighbour has. I would argue that everyone has the right to aspire to what their neighbour has, be it in possessions or status.
The question has to asked; why is David Cameron along with his coalition partners allowing Democracy to be destroyed? Why are they and the Official Opposition supporting a European Union which is blatantly undemocratic? Come to that, when was the last time that this country was truly Democratic? The name on everyones lips this week is, Margaret Thatcher. Was she truly Democratic? Although I admired her greatly, the answer has to be no. Like all post war leaders in this country she believed that there was only so much that the people needed to know. Which, in the interests of Law and Order and National Security, is an admirable principle. However, when it comes to closing down industry in the name of National Interest I believe that full cross-party debate is needed complete with revues of likely local and national effects of such measures. Perhaps she would not be so demonised had such prolonged and detailed debates taken place. I don’t excuse Scargill, here was a man whose sole aim was to bring down the elected Government of the day. The two of them, Margaret Thatcher and Arthur Scargill, could see no common ground on which to agree. Perhaps it would be more truthful to say that neither wanted to see any common ground and therein lay the problem. To be fair to Scargill, when he challenged the MacGregor Plan, arguing that more pits were ear-marked for closure than stated in the Plan, he was to be proved to be right. However, Democracy is about consensus and in Margaret Thatcher and Arthur Scargill was only conviction.
Given the civil unrest witnessed as result of the death of Margaret Thatcher, one has to raise another question. Is the undemocratic, antisocial behaviour manifesting itself within society at the moment, the fault of the Government? The easy answer is, yes! Surely though, it goes much deeper than that. Democracy without rules or ill defined rules is not Democracy and that is the very situation that we find ourselves in today. Isn’t that our fault though? Have we not craved for and then demanded more freedoms, is it not a fact that whilst society demands rules it expects those rules to be infinitely flexible? This, though, is symptomatic of weak Government. It is a fact that society with few rules and weak leadership disintegrates. We elect politicians to represent us in the country and in the World. We entrust in them the good of the community for which they represent. A great responsibility and one which is, sadly, frequently neglected once these people arrive at the Houses of Parliament. It is easier for them to rule through weak and few rules than to adhere to a policy of strict regulation. Yes, of course it is and this is why we have a situation whereby the police commander in charge of Margaret Thatcher’s funeral has condoned disrespectful demonstrations outside the ceremony. It is easier to turn a blind eye than to enforce the strict Rule of Law.
So, who benefits from this lack of discipline in society? I suppose a more apt question would be, who orchestrated this lack of discipline in society? The Left have a lot to answer for on this subject and, so to, does the present Administration. Most leaders crave a totalitarian society whereby people just do as they are told. Much easier to control and much easier to manipulate. The Left and the EU would love the people of this country to be subservient to them. We already have a situation in which our borders are not our own to control, criminals have more rights than victims, undesirables are allowed to stay in this country no matter the rulings of our courts or Parliament. Ironically, all this is perpetuated in the name of Democracy even when the majority of the people in the country are against it.
What is the answer? A very difficult question, especially given that the present crop of politicians are all happy with the situation as it stands. The EU was created on a lie and like all cleverly crafted lies it has duped many a fine political mind. It has to be mentioned that there has been a sorry paucity of said minds of late. We have moved on from ‘conviction’ politics, through ‘consensus’ politics to professional, ‘self serving’ politics. It is these men and women in the latter group who need a weak democracy, who need diversity within the country and, not necessarily, the ethnic diversity that they all say we must have for a fairer society. They issue concessions in order to mask the really dastardly policies which they are pushing through. They increase their own salaries whilst capping the salaries and pensions of ordinary people. Who are the fools? The answer is for the people of this country to wake up. Forget the dogma handed down by generations of Lords, Gentry, Working Class. Dismiss the North/South Divide and decide what is best for you and your children’s future. I’m not talking revolution or taking to the streets, I’m talking about sitting down and viewing things in a true Democratic way. I’m not even asking that people change allegiance in the way that they vote. I’m asking that they look to their politicians and ask themselves, has that man/woman done his/her best for my community? Then ask, has the Party to which they belong done its best for my community as promised prior to polling? In a Democracy we, the people, have the power to change things for the better. It doesn’t hurt to remind our elected representatives of this from time to time. Don’t forget, without you they will be out of a job!
Tension is in the air at the moment. The Left are on the march and given the opportunity they will march us all into the smothering arms of the European Union. The present Government needs a slap. We need to send a message to messieurs Cameron and Clegg that we have had enough of tinkering and want positive action. Failing that get out of the way and allow someone else to do the job.
As a country we have always done better on our own so let us do just that. Leave the EU, forge our own trade links, be masters of our own destiny. It is not difficult, just bold and sensible.