Should we vote in a new government? Or should we link up with the\n struggle to usher in a democratic society?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n In those capitalist nations that have elections, people are asked to select a\nnew government through what is said to be a democratic process. It is true that\nthe vote, together with other hard-won rights such as the rights of assembly,\npolitical organisation and free expression, are most important. But can the act\nof electing a government result in a democratic society?<\/p>\n\n\n\n To govern is to direct, control and to rule with authority. Operating as the\nstate this is what governments do. But to say that democracy is merely the act\nof electing a government to rule over us cannot be right because democracy\nshould include all people in deciding how we live and what we do as a community.\nDemocracy means the absence of privilege, making our decisions from a position\nof equality. Democracy means that we should live in a completely open society\nwith unrestricted access to the information relevant to social issues. It means\nthat we should have the powers to act on our decisions, because without such\npowers decisions are useless. So, regardless of the political colour of the\npolitical party elected to government, how does the operation of the state\nmeasure up to what socialists argue should be a democratic society?<\/p>\n\n\n\n For socialists the rule of government can never be democratic. Though it may\ninclude some incidental functions arising from the needs of people the main work\nof the state is the running of class-divided society; a system of economic\nexploitation. In the main governments work for a privileged section of society.\nThey make the laws which protect the property rights of a minority who own and\ncontrol natural resources, industry, manufacture and transport. These are the\nmeans of life on which we all depend but most of us have no say in how they are\nused. Behind Parliament governments operate in secret. They are part of the\ndivision of the world into rival capitalist states. With the back-up of their\narmed forces they pursue national capitalist interests. Though the politicians\nwho run it may be elected, the state is the opposite of democracy<\/p>\n\n\n\n Production is owned and controlled by companies, some of them multinational\ncorporations with massive economic power making the decisions on what should be\nproduced for the markets for sale at a profit. Through corporate authority they\ndecide how goods should be produced and the conditions in which work is done.\nAgain, this is the opposite of demoraccy<\/p>\n\n\n\n \nSo, how would democracy be fulfilled in socialism? This requires the abolition\nof the state and its replacement by a system of democratic administration. This\ncan only work from a basis of common ownership and production solely for use.\nCommon ownership means that all people throughout the world will stand in equal\nrelationship with each other. This will be an association of all men and women\nmaking the decisions and co-operating to produce goods and organise communities\nin their mutual interests.\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n The democratic organisation of all people as citizens of the world would need\nto operate through different scales of social co-operation. Locally, in town or\ncountry, we would be involved with our parish or neighbourhood. Even now, there\nare many thousands of men and women throughout the country who work voluntarily\non parish and district councils and in town neighbourhoods for the benefit of\ntheir communities. But these efforts would be greatly enhanced by the freedoms\nof a society run entirely through voluntary co-operation.\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n Such local organisation would be in the context of regional co-operation\nwhich could operate by adapting the structures of present national governments.\nWhilst some departments such as those for administering tax and state finances,\nwhich are essential to the state would be abolished, others like Agriculture and\nthe Environment could have an important job to do, especially in the early days\nof socialism. Such structures – adapted to the needs of socialist society –\ncould be part of regional councils and would assist in the work of implementing\nthe decisions of regional populations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During the early days of socialism it is likely that the organisation of\nworld co-operation would need to take place through a world council. Because the\nthings we need now are produced and distributed through a world structure of\nproduction, and because its present capitalist nature has brought about immense\nproblems, action to solve them would be required on a world scale, For example,\nit would be a priority to set up an ecologically benign world energy system as\nsoon as possible. Similarly, the countless millions of people suffering from\nhunger and desperate poverty would need a considerable increase in food\nproduction. For this work the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United\nNations would at last he able to use its expertise and knowledge of world\nconditions to help with solving the problems of malnutrition. Again, to begin\nwith, people in socialism would face a huge task in providing every person with\nsecure and comfortable housing. This would call upon the efforts of communities\nthroughout the world, especially in those regions where means of production were\nwell developed. Such world projects could be co-ordinated through appropriate\ndepartments of a world council.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When we propose different scales of social co-operation such as local,\nregional and world scales, this is not a question of there being a hierarchy\nwith power located at any central point. What we anticipate is both an\nintegrated and flexible system of democtatic organisation which could be adapted\nfor action to solve any proh1em in any of these scales. This simply takes into\naccount that some problems and the action to solve them arise from local issues\nand this also extends to the regional and world spheres.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \nCrucial to the question of democracy is not just the ability to make decisions\nabout what to do but also the powers of action to carry out those decisions. For\nmany years, in many nations, capitalist politicians seeking office have promised\nto solve the housing problem together with the problems if poverty,\nunemployment, pollution, crime, the health service and many more. They have\nfailed because in fact they seek to run a system driven by profit, which imposes\nsevere economic limitations on what can he done and which as a result cannot be\nrationally controlled. This makes a mockery of the idea of democracy. But with\nthe abolition of the market system, communities in socialism will not only be\nable to make free and democratic decisions about what needs to be done they will\nalso be free to use their resources to achieve those aims.\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n The apologies that we hear almost every day from capitalist politicians that\nthey lack the money resources to solve problems indicates how completely the\nfetishism of money has distorted their thinking. In fact problems are not solved\nwith money resources. They are solved by people using their labour, skills and\nthe necessary materials and there is in fact an abundance of these material\nresources. But it will take the relations of common ownership to release them\nfor the needs of communities and this will also mean that communities will be\nfree to decide democratically how best to use those resources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The corporate authorities or managerial systems which now dictate how\nproduction units such as factories or services should be run would be replaced.\nSmall units could be run by regular meetings of all the workers. In the cases of\nlarge organisations these could be run by elected committees accountable to the\npeople working in them. In this way, democratic practice would apply not just to\nthe important policy decisions that would steer the main direction of\ndevelopment, it would extend to the day-to-day activities of the work place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But democracy would not be confined to the serious work of production and the\nrunning of the work place. People in socialism will he free to create sporting\nand other cultural festivals. The entertainment of visitors from other parts of\nthe world would bring diversity and richness to local life. The possibilities\nfor decision making and the planning and enjoyment of such events are endless.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Socialism opens up a great range of new possibilities. With the populations\nof all countries co-operating as one people, working together in their common\ninterests whilst celebrating their cultural differences and joining in\ndemocratically deciding a new future, the prospects can only be seen as\nexciting. What a contrast with the dreary prospects of electing yet another\ncapitalist government and giving a further lease of life for an out-dated\ncapitalist state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Author: P. Lawrence<\/p>\n\n\n\n Back to the ‘Dream On’ Index<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nReal democracy<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Carrying out decisions<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n