” …in addition to fear itself, the one other thing everyone should fear, is governments believing that they know what they are doing, when transitioning to central planning and an authoritarian regime, based on nothing but faith. ” ZeroHedge – Bill Buckler
If you are looking for a term that means whatever you want it to, then you can’t do much better than Democracy.
If on the one hand you mean – government of the people, by the people, for the people – that surely is a lovely concept of Democracy.
If on the other hand you mean – parliamentary government selected via two party general elections – then that is a system and definition that has passed it’s use-by-date. One so captured and corrupted that it is beyond redemption. (if you’re inclined to debate that, then you are reading the wrong blog)
As to what you would replace the current system with, once again there are two perspectives on the issue.
On one hand – it really doesn’t matter:
Make it up as you go along – stop, backtrack, change things if they are not working – treat the whole exercise as an evolving work in progress. There are a hundred and one alternative mechanisms for running a country that either already exist elsewhere, have been formulated in theory, or could be dreamed up in time of need. The specifics are unimportant, merely that you are brave enough to try. For some people, the open opportunity is all that is necessary for them to explore the possibilities and dream.
And on the other hand – a prescription is required:
In order to commit to and support overturning the status-quo, a credible alternative plan needs to be promulgated and endorsed. Airy-fairy statements of principle or grandiose plans, simply doesn’t cut it for a lot of people.
I guess I have a foot in both camps.
I am actually quite happy with the laissez faire approach, but equally, this blog is an attempt in fact to prescribe the ingredients and methodology required to implement a comprehensive improved alternative to our current system.
In order to replace a system, you need to have some basic minimum structure(and theory) to substitute. The more complete and comprehensible that is, the easier it is for people to accept and work with. It’s a confidence question(and a practicalities one too).
But I also believe in the necessity of leaving open some questions, so that the solutions and answers proposed, can evolve with changing circumstances.
So, I guess I am a Democrat. I have a real attachment to the principles of the French and American Revolutions. But I don’t accept or respect what currently passes for democracy in this country.
In so far as democracy is whatever you say it is, then my Revolution would be democratic. It just wouldn’t be very recognisable vis the current system, the formal institutions would have to change.
I intend to continue writing essays and articles, to address those issues and to develop alternatives(your feedback would be welcomed too).
Word count 499