Blog 5 Questions from the Reading

Blog 5:

Choose one of the scenarios described in the reading and answer questions embedded in the text of that scenario.

1. Can we find any reason that does not ultimately come down to belief that democratic social arrangements promote a better quality of human experience, one which is more widely accessible and enjoyed, than do non-democratic and anti-democratic forms of social life?

2. Does not the principle of regard for individual freedom and for decency and kindliness of human relationships come back in the end to the conviction that these things are tributary to a higher quality of experience on the part of a greater number than are methods or repression and coercion or force?

3. Is it not the reason for our preference that we believe that mutual consultation and convictions reached through persuasion make possible a better quality of experience than can otherwise be provided on any wide scale?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1. In the theoretical model of representative democracy, a given population will always succumb to the needs of the many. By default, the standard of living and the human experience for the largest number of people should be at desired levels, as a result of the decisions made by them, the majority. Unfortunately, as is the case in Canada, a majority is hard to come by. It is too difficult to get 50% of the population to agree on a vast number of decisions. In order to avoid chaos, the largest of the minorities will assume power. So in practice, the majority of the total population will end up being alienated, while the minority government will manoeuvre itself to stay in power. Flexing and aligning itself with one ideology to the next, the government will appease one group temporarily, before shuffling to the next issue and allying itself with a different set of people to retain power. However, this process does, by default, appease a broad range of people, not all at once of course, but some will have their needs met at a certain time, and others will have their needs met at other times, depending on the political climate. Unlike non-democratic governments, whose power is not threatened by the disapproval of the civilian population, they do not need to appease any large number of people at a time. In fact, the smallest group of people is able to take control, even if the majority of the populations disagrees with their policies and beliefs. The rulers are able to satisfy their own needs and offer a single political point of view for the entire nation to subscribe to. With only one option, the people can either take it or go without. In many ways, non-democratic systems have the superior ability to implement law and amend their system over democratic systems. Without complicated houses of representatives or votes, non-democratic systems are able to focus primarily on the implementation of law, rather than the formation of it. The final comparison between these systems reveals to us that in the democratic model, the people’s needs are of great concern, because without a reasonable amount of civilian appeasement, the government will ultimately collapse and be replaced. This system will of course focus on the improvement of the human experience of the greatest population. On the other hand, non democratic systems are less concerned with the standards of the population’s experience, as their primary concern is the retention of power and control, and their own needs.

2. YES! Regard for individual freedom amongst a population will engender a greater experience. The conviction that being good to people will make life better, is an accurate one. I don’t believe that people subscribe to the golden rule because they perceive it as a means to achieving a utopian society. I doubt that they put as much political emphasis on it as say who they vote for. But the domestic understanding is that respect for individual freedom is the foundation of a free and just society.

3. A better quality of human experience can be achieved if we are guided by passionate arguments and an appeal to our favour, rather than not being given an explanation and expected to comply simply on faith. On a greater and greater scale people want more authority in their lives, it is a trend we have seen on the grand scale of our history. The move towards democracy is one example of how people want more autonomy, consider also civil rights and the gender rights movement. We want to be won. We want to be desired and pandered to. That is why we subscribe to a system that promotes debate, discussion, and drama.