Sep 11, 2006 11:55:41 AM cite

Any answer to this question needs urgently a definition of democracy: If the elected politician is forced to act according to the will of his electors - i.e. "power to the people" - it might be the best way to handle politically the actions of a whole society - but is this realistic ? I find no way in the concrete democracy I live in, to have "my" politicians do what I want them to do ... So, maybe, it's the best of all the bad possibilities! But, if anyone finds a solution to reach the (idealistic?) democracy described above, please tell me about it !!

by wolf

Sep 10, 2006 7:53:31 AM cite

Until the individual is not recognized as the highest value in the Universe, there is no system worth to be considered. Democracy is based on a collective state of mind and it works only on the lowest common agreements. What everybody needs now is to expand consciousness and therefore being able to live in a co-operative way which does not impeed the liberty of the individual or in other words: From control to free choice - which is of course possible only with personal growth.

by mbl

Sep 9, 2006 9:10:57 PM cite

The world is an ever evolving place. Democracy is just one political form which we experience at this present time as something that can bring us close to freedom and better quality of life. However, it certainly is nothing final. We already can see where democracy starts to fail towards other areas of our time that are clearly evolving faster. For example, it took years until appropriate laws were passed in order to define law on the internet. Democracy is a very slow system and may prove to become too slow at some point. For now it may serve well and those who live in a democratic society may be grateful for it's benefits. It certainly does not hurt if we continue to develop new ideas and think outside the box to pave the way for future improvements.

by QuantumSpirit

Sep 9, 2006 5:01:18 PM cite

The answer to the question would likely be Yes. But that is only because we haven't experienced democracy yet. The best representative structures have us waddle to the polls, in ever decreasing numbers, and appoint our lackey to attend meetings that have more self interest than community benefit in mind. If we want democracy, it is necessary for us to participate in the process fully. I have heard all the arguments regarding the unweildliness of this suggestion but would suggest that the current system only favours those who are actively involved in its functional areas. Majority rule can create a system that discriminates and oppresses but I have faith that if we are all accepting our responsibility to particpate, then eventually this too will be remedied.

by everydayaction

Sep 9, 2006 3:44:51 PM cite

there certainly is, but we haven't found out yet.

by AvB

Sep 9, 2006 2:29:59 PM cite

Find some answers in Plato's Politeia.

by eijsenga

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Antoschka - Ekaterina Moshaeva: At the moment we have no better system better than the democracy. We must only bring democracy to a new level, make it free from all heavy understandings of democracy. Democracy means freedom of thinking, feeling, freedom to make your life, you know. Democracy is a wonderful political structure. A question is, what it means for us. In civilized countries democracy is becoming heavy, deformed formes. It isn't understood in the right way. May be a new system should be created, which would be called a global, wolrdwide democracy of the developed consciousness, a democracy of a higher mind. I think, that it lies not on a word itself, how do you call it, because nowadays democracy is one of the most positive structures. Of course, with time another social structure could be created, which would be based on a larger possibility, on a great personal freedom.

by Antoschka - Ekaterina Moshaeva

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Abbas Beydoun: I guess that the right question should be „what will come after democracy?" rather than "Is something better than democracy?". Maybe Democracy will not be virtuous but nothing comes after democracy.

by Abbas Beydoun

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Alvaro Restrepo: I think, the human race has found a perfect way for self-government and is seeking to develop a most just and fair system. I think, though, that in the name of democracy many arbitrary and unjust acts have been committed too. In my opinion democracy is the most perfect of the most imperfect methods that human race has developed for self-government so far. But as I said before, in the name of democracy many unjust acts have been committed. Sometimes we condemn totalitarian systems like the totalitarian system in Cuba, for example. Cuba has deprived its people of the right to elect their government. The price for the future achievements in the field of education and health care, were numerous battles, eventually won by regime. Democracy had to be sacrificied in order to have fairer society. I come from a country with, it is said, the most ancient democracy in America. I come from Colombia. An in the name of this democracy we live in a state without justice, in constant fear and violence. I think this is dramatic, because we sacrifice much in the name of democracy. Democracy is like synthesis of a government formed by minority and the benefit for all.

by Alvaro Restrepo

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Ana Lucy Bengochea: Real democracy is when everyone has a right to choose one person, when communities and entire nations have a right to choose one person and say: "you are our leader and we want you to represent us". Democracy that dictates, especially dictatorial democracy, democracy that requires money in order to get to power and people without money have no chance to get it, have no chance to attain high position, this kind of democracy is wrong. We are part of an international project, where women work on a global level implementing democracy, sharing their experience, learning from each other like equal to equal. Democracy means giving a chance to communities to draft their own development and to define the word "development" on their own.

by Ana Lucy Bengochea

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Andries Botha: Hi Alex, Andries here. You know, Alex, just to be very simple, I would like to say to you let’s hope so. Let’s hope there is something better that democracy. You know because democracy by all accounts is sort of another level of consensual autocracy. It is better than the systems we’ve had in the past but it’s certainly very very flawed. And as such you know we should be constantly searching for new forms of government. Quite clearly, you know, government itself assumes and works on the premise that people need to be governed because they’re unable to govern themselves. You know that may well be right. Is there something better than democracy? Well I’ll go back to what I said. I certainly hope there is, because democracy leaves a lot to be desired. You know let’s just have a look at democracy, where, lets - anywhere. You know you’ve got two or three parties, four parties, five parties maybe, contending for power. Usually they’re driven and represented around their ability to actually financially be in the game. But really at the end of the day, countries are ruled by two parties contesting one another. With the two parties increasingly that are contesting one another, there is so little difference between the two, that, you know, I think in a way we’ve just accepted that the way in which we’ve constructed our political systems are the only way in which we can govern ourselves. Just one more thought. Before we even come to issues of democracy, we should be considering more effective and efficient ways as to how we should govern ourselves. And that’s a deeper question that we need to ask ourselves. I believe if we learn to govern ourselves better, then it doesn’t really matter who governs your country. Because the force of that internal level of governance transcends the outer level of governance. Because the outer level of governance is just a bureaucratic system that makes sure that the roads are good and that the schools run and stuff like that, but the inner level of government is a far more significant issue that we could be addressing.

by Andries Botha

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Angaangaq Lyberth: Alex, yes there is something better than democracy. You know the world had gone to wars these days to create democracy in the world when they don’t even have democracy in their own homes. We have understood so little of the significance of democracy that it’s not even funny any longer. We all based on partisanry, dividing people from one another. I myself, I was a young politician in the old days. I found myself putting someone down to be looking better than the others. And telling my voters, vote for me, I am better, more trustworthy than the others. Then I realized what the heck I was doing. I was actually putting down someone so I can be like better than the others and get elected. And here I thought I was working on the democracy. True democracy is something which allows me to be able to work for the best one to serve me and my place of home, and my city, and my nation. Those are the ones who will lift up me, lift me up to be a better human being. Because the way we do it now we have to put someone down to be elected and that has nothing to do with democracy. Yes, there are something much better than democracy. Time will come when you and I will be able to elect somebody in absolute silence. When you and I will look around and see who is best to serve me. And he becomes the servant of me to make sure that everything according to what needs I have will be done. Not what they want to do in the name of what I need. You and I we look at what we want rather than look at what we need. Until the day when we complete our needs what we want will never come. Yes, there is something much better than democracy. I look forward to that day and I need your help for that. So I trust you will be able to help me. Thank you.

by Angaangaq Lyberth

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Anthony Arnove: Well, if we accept the existing definition of democracy, then the answer is absolutely yes, because what today is called democracy is undemocratic. What today is called democracy really is plutocracy, the control of those who have money, the control by those who have wealth, and through that wealth, people who dominate and control the basic institutions of power, corporate institutions that offset political institutions. And so really democracy, as it’s called today is not in any way the high achievement of the possibility of organizing the society in a way that is participatory, that is humane, that is just. In fact, democracy goes hand and hand with the whole economic system and the political system that denies meaningful participation for the vast majority of the world’s people, even those who live under democracies. So, there is a better alternative, a truly democratic alternative, in which people rule, collectively make the decisions, govern their own lives, and participate in all of the spheres of economic life, including economic spheres. But, today, they have no saying, and historically that vision has been called socialism. I think it’s important to specify that one means socialism from below not from above, not the dictatorial brutal distortion of socialism that we saw in the 20th century with the rise of Stalinism and Maoism, but genuine democratic participatory socialism and socialism from below. And that would be far better to the democracy that we have today, and it’s something that we can achieve, it’s something that we can bring about. And that’s something that we urgently need to bring about.

by Anthony Arnove

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Anuradha Koirala: If you practice and preach democracy as it is defined then I feel that there is nothing better than democracy.

by Anuradha Koirala

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Anuradha Mittal: Yes, I guess people have come to believe that democracy, the Western liberal concept of democracy, means you go and vote and U.S., for example, becomes the champion, the leader of democracy. The democracy I believe in and I feel is better than the Western liberal concept of democracy is people’s democracy. It’s a food democracy where no one goes hungry, where people and the farmers have the right to choose what they grow, how they grow it, and that everyone gets to eat it. What I believe in is citizens’ democracy, and then democracy is not just about voting and hope that everyone got to vote which often does not happen in the United States or hope that our votes were actually counted which again in the United States has not happened though it is a champion of democracy. But it is really about citizens’ democracy, which starts not just from the day of voting and seizing the power as a voter, but it actually continues the day after the voting is over, after the election results are out. The citizens are ensuring that the governments they have elected are accountable to them, that they hold them responsible for the decisions they make. So it is not that despite millions of people marching, Bush administration can go to war in Iraq, that despite millions marching in Australia, John Howard’s government can support the war in Iraq, or in England, another mother of monarchy where they think that it’s okay for them to basically defy the will of millions of people who are on the streets of London and elsewhere in England and say, “Okay, we are still going to war.” So, yeah, I would say that is better than this Western liberal concept of democracy that has been thrust upon the rest of the world by the United States and other Western nations; and that is real democracy, people’s democracy, citizens’ democracy, food democracy that I actually believe in.

by Anuradha Mittal

Sep 9, 2006 1:05:00 PM cite

Ashok Gangadean: I like this question very much, because in one sense there is nothing better than true democracy. And the question is asking, to my mind is, what is real democracy? And again, the pattern of my other answers, keep going back to a fundamental difference in the cultural technology of consciousness in which we are speaking. If we are in an ego-based way of thinking and being in a culture and trying to practice democracy from an egocentric or ego-mental mindset, that’s not true democracy as I understand it and that’s not true power of the people and power to the people. By contrast, a culture based upon integral whole consciousness, a consciousness of our interconnectivity, a consciousness that brings us into the profound space in which we realize our deepest individuality and diversity and yet our common ground, is a different and higher form of democracy. So if we use the word egocracy, ego-democracy and egocracy, that is not the place in which there was genuine dialogue amongst the people, direct connection in the civic space. And in fact, we might say that to the extent that our culture is dominated by egocentric patterns, we do not have a true democracy. Because the civic space in which we are in an ego-culture is profoundly divided across our world views and perspectives. And there is no real true dialogue, but egologue and monologue and clash of cultural perspectives and world views within the culture and within the broken civic space. So that the people are not together in any deep sense where we can find our common ground in diversity. And there really is no really “we the people.” And democracy, true democracy is the power of the people, government by the people, for the people. And if we are not a people, in that deep sense of interconnectivity and healthy dialogue, then we're broken and fragmented as people and therefore, governments can and other regimes can take over the power and usurp the power, when the people are not watching and are not together. So, what is better than ego-democracy is true holistic democracy, a democracy of awakened citizens, sharing civic space and deep dialogue and deep interconnectivity, where we realize our true individuality and diversity and common ground. E Pluribus Unum, as we have inscribed in our penny in the United States: “Out of the many, one." So we cannot find that unity and diversity in an ego-based culture. So what is better than democracy, the ego-based democracy, is a democracy based on a culture of true dialogue, global citizenship, global consciousness, in which you can have and celebrate true diversity in a common ground.

by Ashok Gangadean