THE ILLUSION OF DEMOCRACY
Without idealism, politics is reduced to a kind of "social accounting!"
It is said that democracy is losing its appeal and that more and more people are tired of this democracy,
which is completely wrong, because it is difficult to get tired of something that does not exist.
On the other hand, it is not entirely impossible that people start to tire of the so-called representative democracy, which means that a few selected politicians
manage the political affairs for everyone else, who - during the term of office - get the opportunity to realize their private life projects.
In a society where political centralization has generated an increasingly widening gap between power and the
people, where more and more people experience a kind of political exclusion.
In the increasingly widening gap between power and the people, there is growing resignation and frustration in the ranks of the people, which not infrequently expresses itself
in various forms of contempt and downright contempt for the political elite, which in itself means a breeding ground for a feeling of political exclusion.
We have, as the British political scientist Colin Crouch describes it, ended up in
a post-democratic state with all that this entails.Where more and more people do not feel included in democracy, where they feel that they lack the ability to influence society or to make their voice heard.
Actually, it shouldn't be very surprising that
people get tired of the kind of politics that goes on beyond our references and about which we know so little, where we only have to speculate about how thoughts go before decisions.
It is also not so strange that people feel powerless and
get tired of a political system that assumes that whoever has the greatest decision-making authority has the least contact with the plan, where the consequences of the decisions become reality, while the one who has the most contact with the human side of
the decisions consequences, lacks decision-making authority. Harald Ofstad
The so-called representative democracy of our time, where a few politicians manage politics for us, is not about popular rule, but about tyranny, in other words,
it is not about democracy but about oligarchy, where oligarchy means precisely tyranny.
It is for this reason that I dared to state at the beginning of this text that democracy - in the true sense of the word - does not exist.
we in Sweden have been to democracy is probably before the municipal merger in the 70s, when democracy was a living and locally rooted reality that concerned the people. At the time when democracy was a vital popular and educational movement, which made people
experience meaningful contexts in the joint community building work.
Over time, these grassroots movements, driven by zealots and carried by a common idea, have gradually been incorporated into the bureaucratic forms of the people's home
and thereby lost their independence in more institutional forms.
The political activity of today's modern man extends at its height to visiting a polling station every four years, which according to the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau,
is about "selective aristocracy" where the power of citizens lies in choosing our own rulers. In the course of these four years, we have to praise or complain about the municipal service, in that the citizen has abdicated his political responsibility and been
cut off from being a part of the joint community building work.
The French social scientist Marcel Gauchet believes that it has gone so far that our time has produced the first man in history, who is unaware of society; She is not unaware
of society in the superficial sense of not noticing it.
She is unaware of society in the sense that she is no longer aware of the social conditions of her own existence, and of her own "embedding" in a larger collective, and of what this has entailed
for thousands of years in the form of obligations and duties.
It should be added that it is not only about obligations, but above all about opportunities in a social context where "true democracy cannot be justified in any other way than
as an effort to liberate and develop the personality", as the former democracy advocate Herbert Tingsten once said .
After all, in some kind of general unconsciousness, we can still live in the notion that we have democracy, we are still
in a state of law where we have freedom of the press and freedom of speech and the law on universal suffrage enshrined in the constitution!
Sure, these freedoms are certainly some expression of democracy, - as long as we have them -
but if we think we have democracy, for the sole reason that we have universal suffrage enshrined in the constitution, we are living in a deceptive illusion of what democracy is is and is not. Furthermore, this with the right to vote and majority decisions
has a very weak connection to democracy, some of those who helped invent democracy, went so far as to say that democracy disappeared when we started voting, which in itself is a statement that today can regarded as purely prophetic.
considering that in Europe there is a noticeable tendency to actually vote democracy away, which happened in Germany in the 30s, in the Balkans in the 90s and in Hungary, Poland and a number of other countries in the 2000s.