Democracy is a beautiful principle. But alas, the realization of this principle has led to the simple fact that the principle has been diluted beyond recognition.
The political sideshow of being re-elected has been distorted so that focus is on keeping power to implement your own policies, more than to make sure, that it is in fact the voters that are controlling the politicians and thereby the politics implemented. Politics have been disassociated from the voters; They are allowed two crossing lines on a ballot, but these lines give minimal influence on the politics being realized. The existing electoral system prevent a periodical effective ventilation of the political reality. After an election it is simply back to the same procedure as last time.
It is the self-appointed political elite that are safeguarding their exclusive access to the ballot through the system of political parties hindering access for political alternatives as much as possible. It is the economic elite, that are using comradeship with the political elite to safeguard their short-term economic interests, at the expense of those political views that are truly prevalent among voters.
Demo-Cracy: “People-govern” has become “the elite govern the people” – the opposite of true democracy, where people govern politicians.
For people to be in true power there are some prerequisites:
- The equal right for all to participate in free and unmanipulated elections of parliamentarians, who have the sole right to pass legislation.
- The right to elect parliamantarians, who will seek to pass their promises, honestly and transparently.
- A stringent division of power. It should be divided, not in three parts, but in four, because the legislative power should be split in two:
- The right to propose legislation: parliamentarians should have this right. It can also be given members of the government, and even to the people, through petitions.
- The right to pass legislation: This power should be given solely to parliamentarians, elected directly by the people; There shall be no structural divisions between the voters and the individuals with this right, which means that this right should NOT be given to individuals appointed as members of government, EU-commissioners or other persons, who have been appointed to their political post.
Furthermore the parliament should be representative of the variation of political views in the electorate, by having as sufficient high number of members compared to the size of the electorate, which is not the case in the EU-parliament.
- The right to execute legislation: This right should be given to the government, consisting of persons appointed by a parliament, adhering to the demands stated earlier. It should NOT be given persons who have been appointed, by persons who have been appointed, as is the case in the EU with the EU-commissioners. Persons appointed minister should NOT also be a member of parliament with the right to vote. But they can be given the right to debate proposals to legislation in parliament.
- The right to pass judgment based on legislation: should be given to courts of justice, independent of governments and parliaments. The court should only be allowed to pass judgment based on legislation passed by a true parliament, not political treaties, as is the case in the EU.
The EU court is not a court of justice, but a court of elitist power.
The ballot is the ticket to power. If the people are to be able to control politicians, access to the ballot should not become distorted.
Only people can be held accountable. Only people can act in accordance with the views on which they were elected – or the opposite.
It therefore stands to reason that only individuals should be electable on the ballot, not political parties. Voters should be forced to vote for an individual, and political parties as a unit for election should be removed from the ballot. A political party is nothing but a society of people, controlled by its own elite. Political parties have been given special privileges as a legal entity, and its candidates can hide behind this entity and hope that the numbers of votes are sufficient for them to be elected.
All focus is given to the elite of the party. One consequence is party-discipline, not very different from military discipline. Each candidate is elected on equal terms with all the other candidates, but he or she does not have equal rights to act independently from the party elite. A clear-cut distortion.
Control over the ministerial officials is another power factor, being distorted. Officials typically have a duty to obey the ministers, especially when they are forced to compose reports underpinning the policy chosen by the minister and the government, even though the official can see that the chosen policy is not sustainably designed, politically, economically, socially or environmentally. Officials should be employed by parliament, not by the ministries, and have a freedom to act according to what they believe is in balance between different political perspectives, when they compose their reports for parliament. Ministers should be allowed to order reports composed, but not to control the contents or conclusions.
The political balance of power should be shifted from being dominated by government to being dominated by the parliament. The government should simply be the handymen for the parliament, executing legislation passed by the parliament. It is about the formation of government and bloc politics. It is about the two-party systems being so prevalent, even in the “perfect” democracy of a country like Denmark. Countries claim to be democratic, but in reality they are controlled by a political elite, not by the electorate. Removing political parties from the ballot is one way to fight this elitism, making it easier to get rid of parliamentarians who do not adhere to their promises, or are enforcing politics that are not in accordance with the majority in the electorate.
Supra-national legislation is necessary to solve cross-border problems, like the environment, especially the climate. Close and formalized cooperation between nations is vital. But it must not be the supra-national institution who determine what political subject should be treated supra-nationally, and they should not be allowed to pass and then to enforce legislation on its own. This violates the principle of division of power stated earlier.
Power to pass actual legislation should be given solely to national parliaments, including legislation proposed by supranational institutions. Supra-national institutions working with designing supra-national legislation should be structured as inter-parliamentary alliances, where national parliamentarians work closely together with minsters and officials in analyzing problems and finding solution, applicable in every member state in a constructive manner. But legislation should always be passed at the national level, never the supra-national level.
A Supra-national parliament consisting of members elected directly and members from national parliaments would be an effective way of implementing this parliamentary alliance. More can be read in my book, especially chapter 7, and here.