From Democracy To Tyrani Of Majority

From «Democracy» to «Tyranny of the majority» v.1.01 http://area51gr.blogspot.com/

The truth that no-one talks about! The way they fool the people to think they live in a democratic world where they have some power, when they have.. nothing in a Tyranny world! Dedicated to Adonis Georgiadhs, Greece which with his answers and his TV shows made me think deeper this subject.

I'll start by utilizing a few definitions. wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy "Athenian democracy was developed in the Greek city-state of Athens, comprising the central city-state of Athens and the surrounding territory of Attica, around 500 BC. Athens was one of the very first known democracies (although anthropological research suggests that democratic forms were likely common in stateless societies long before the rise of Athens[citation needed]). Other Greek cities set up democracies, most but not all following an Athenian model, but none were as powerful or as stable (or as well-documented) as that of Athens. It remains a unique and intriguing experiment in direct democracy where the people do not elect representatives to vote on their behalf but vote on legislation and executive bills in their own right. Participation was by no means open, but the in-group of participants was constituted with no reference to economic class and they participated on a scale that was truly phenomenal. The public opinion of voters was remarkably influenced by the political satire performed by the comic poets at the theatres.[1] " [...] "The word "democracy" (Greek: δημοκρατια) combines the elements demos (δημος, which means "people") and kratos (κρατος, which means "force" or "power"). In the words "monarchy" and "oligarchy", the second element arche means rule, leading, or being first. It is not possible that the term "democracy" was coined by its detractors who rejected the possibility of, so to speak, a valid "demarchy", as long as the word "dematchy" already existed and had the meaning of mayor or municipal. That is why a new term has been invented, and was adopted wholeheartedly by Athenian democrats." The very first known democracy was in Athens of Ancient Greece, where those Athenians invented that term - "DEMOCRACY". There the democracy was a direct democracy "where the people do not elect representatives to vote on their behalf but vote on legislation and executive bills in their own right". There where no representatives. From what I have heared from Adonis Georgiadis which is a historian, and from what I can understand, in Ancient Greece, there where a group of high-respect people that where developing the different laws. The laws, then were ready to open voting procedure, where simple people - the Athenians - would vote them positive or negative. For each possible law, there was an independent voting. Athenians at that days, was about 20,000 people, and it was possible to gather all together and vote the different laws in public, and not in secret voting. That was the Democracy, as was invented, adopted and used... and still today they utilize this world as a term to perscuade people that we have the best system of goverment, and thus nothing can change! Today all we talk about Democracy. But, due to physical limitation, the Democracy we talk about, can't exist in it's prime invented form. I don't know how other countries utilize Democracy to their political systems, but I know a few things on about what is happening to my Country, Greece. As I said, due to physical limitation Democracy nowdays can't exist as the direct democracy that ancient Athenians had invented. That's because nowdays, here, instead of 20,000 citizens participation in a small space to the size of a city, we have about 10,000,000 in a space to the size of a country. Till now it was impossible to gather all those people, in every a while, for an open voting for each possible new law. For that reason the ancient Athenian Democracy, was modified to the "representative democracy" wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

"Democracy is a system of government in which either the actual governing is carried out by the people (as in representative democracy). The term is derived from the Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratía (info)), "popular government",[1] which was coined from δῆμος (dêmos), "people" and κράτος (krátos), meaning "power" in the middle of the fifth-fourth century BC to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens following a popular uprising in 508 BC.[2] In political theory, democracy describes a small number of related forms of government and also a political philosophy. Even though there is no specific, universally accepted definition of 'democracy',[3] there are two principles that any definition of democracy includes, equality and freedom. [4] These principles are reflected by all citizens being equal before the law, and having equal access to power.[5] Additionally, all citizens are able to enjoy legitimized freedoms and liberties, which are usually protected by a constitution.[6][7] There are several varieties of democracy, some of which provide better representation and more freedoms for their citizens than others.[8][9] However, if any democracy is not carefully legislated to avoid an uneven distribution of political power with balances, such as the separation of powers, then a branch of the system of rule could accumulate power and become harmful to the democracy itself.[10][11][12] The "majority rule" is often described as a characteristic feature of democracy, but without responsible government or constitutional protections of individual liberties from democratic power it is possible for dissenting individuals to be oppressed by the "tyranny of the majority". An essential process in representative democracies is competitive elections, that are fair both substantively[13] and procedurally.[14] Furthermore, freedom of political expression, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are essential so that citizens are informed and able to vote in their personal interests.[15][16]

Popular sovereignty is common but not a universal motivating philosophy for establishing a democracy. In some countries, democracy is based on the philosophical principle of equal rights. Many people use the term "democracy" as shorthand for liberal democracy, which may include additional elements such as political pluralism, equality before the law, the right to petition elected officials for redress of grievances, due process, civil liberties, human rights, and elements of civil society outside the government." Notice the phrase: "Many people use the term "democracy" as shorthand for liberal democracy". What is liberal democracy? wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_democracy "Liberal democracy (or constitutional democracy) is the dominant form of democracy in the 21st century. During the Cold War, liberal democracies were contrasted with the Communist People's Republics or "Popular Democracies", which claimed an alternative conception of democracy. Today, constitutional democracies are mostly contrasted with direct democracy and/or participatory democracy. Liberal democracies may take various constitutional forms: they may be republics, as the United States or India or France, or constitutional monarchy, as the United Kingdom or Spain. It may have a presidential system (United States), a parliamentary system (Westminster system, UK and Commonwealth countries), or a hybrid, semi-presidential system (France)." Constitutional (Liberal) democracies are mostly constrasted with direct democracy (as it was invented in Ancient Athens), and people use the term "Democracy" as a shorthand for liberal democracy! The first point of what we are going to see, is obvious!... We don't have the "Democracy" as it was invented in Ancient Greece / Ancient Athens (direct democracy) that many people do believe, because others do, on purpose, confuce the term Democracy with the term Liberal Democracy! We have a modification of Democracy (Liberal Democracy) which is mostly constrasted with the "original" Democracy". And of course if two things are mostly constrasted, then it's obvious that they... are not even just different, but opposite! Thus, with a few logical steps, we can understand that Liberal Democracy is almost opposite to Democracy. If Democracy (ancient Athenian Democracy - original one) is based on equality and and freedom, and is for the good of all people, then our new Liberal Democracy, isn't based on equality and/or freedom, and/or isn't for the good of all people!

If (our new) Liberal Democracy is mostly constrasted with (the ancient) Democracy, then it is interesting to see on what king of system of goverment, it seems to be most alike. Before we continue, remember the following words from the wiki as they have been written above: "without responsible government or constitutional protections of individual liberties from democratic power it is possible for dissenting individuals to be oppressed by the "tyranny of the majority""

Let's see the modification on Democracy, to reach from the ancient Democracy, to the today's system of Democracy in Greece. Modification to Democracy #1 & #2 Due to physical limitations, citizens can't vote for each law independently. #1) To come up with that problem - physical space limitation -, it was decided people to vote for a representative. In Greece, citizens vote, for 300 representatives, that will vote for the laws instead of them. #2) Also, because it would be difficult to vote new representatives for each law-judgment - physical time limitation -, it was decided those representatives to vote for a series of possible laws, actually, for all the laws that may be proposed in a 4 years time. The physical limitations problems are passed, but we have created new problem in our Democracy. Problem #1 People doesn't vote for accepting or rejecting laws, but they vote for elections of their representatives. The less the representatives are, the less Democracy we have. Why I am saying this? In Greece we are 10,000,000 citizens and we elect 300 representatives. What that means? That every 33,333 citizens are represented by 1 person! If that person was responsible for the voting of one and only law, then there wouldn't be any problem, as this person would represent the decision of the majority of the 33,333. But this person will vote for a series of laws, where the majority of the citizens that elected him, may not agree, and this is due to the fact, that no-one can know what possible laws may be proposed in the next 4 years! Thus, with this modification citizens doesn't anymore vote for the validity of the laws, based on the direct effects that the laws may have on them, but for the election of a representative based on hypotheses and predictions they do for the long future (4 years!), which in majority are wrong, deceptive, or even frauded. Actually with this modification, citizens doesn't vote the laws, but the hope! this means they have no power at all on the political system, rather than the power to express their hopes and will. Problem #2. Seeing the current system better, we can notice another problem. Before the elections, we have a lot of candidates. Intuitively speaking, before the elections, we have about 50 possible representatives for every 33,333 citizens from which only 1 is elected. The one that is elected usually has been voted of about a 8% of the citizens, thus he actually represents the 1/12 of the citizens. Let's give an example from a region where in national elections of 2009 the first representative took 10.9% of the total votes, the second representative took 9.5%, the third took 8.9%, till the last one that took 0.6%!.. What that means? Than in best case, 33,333 citizens are being represented from one person that only the 10.9% wanted (3,633 citizens), and in the worst case there was a representative which from another set of 33,333 citizens only (0.6%) 199 citizens wanted! (Outrageous?) In other words, only 1/12 citizens (in intuitively average) has the representative he wants, to vote the laws for him!.. And of course as I said in Problem #1, this small percent of 8% wanted this representative, not to vote the laws they do want, but because it has done the hypothesis and prediction that this representative will represent them in the next 4 years with the same hopes and wills, and thus it is most probably to do vote the laws they might want! - It's a huge difference there, based on hypotheses and predictions!! All would be just fine, if we hadn't in this way a huge percentage of citizens that are not being represented (because they didn't vote for the specific representative), that comes up to 92%! With such huge percentages people would go down to streets and destroy that system of government.

Thus a new modification is needed, to fulfill the problem #1, and cover up the problem #2. Modification to Democracy #3 Invention of Political Parties. Political parties consist of a set of citizens that share the same political ideologies. Political ideologies, are used to set up an abstract imaginable way, which simplifies the complicated hypotheses and predictions that citizens has to do, in order to elect a representative for the unknown future. In this way Problem #1, is simplified to an easy understating intuitive way, where people can compare their hopes and wills and decide which representatives are like them and thus it is most possible to vote the laws they want. On the other hand, the Political Parties, group under the same ideology a number of representatives, adding by this way their percentages, producing virtually higher percentages of representation! I.e. if 6 possible representatives with percentages 10%, 9%, 8.5%, 8%, 7%, 5% are grouped under the same Political Party, and only the representative with 10% is elected, then the citizens won't protest because 33,333 citizens will be represented by 1 person that only 3,333 citizens want when the other do not want, but instead in this case the 33,333 citizens will judge that the 1 person of 10% that elected, is representing and the other (9+8.5+8+7+5) = 37.5%, thus in total the one that elected represents the 47.5% of the total! Thus there is no reason to protest! As we can see, the Modification to Democracy #3, simplifies the Problem #1, and at the same time covers up the Problem #2. Problem #3. Simplification of the Problem #1 consists of a straight approval that we don't vote the laws, as in Democracy we should do, but instead we vote to express our hope and will! People stop concerning about the laws, and instead they concern on who is the one that express their hope and will in the best way!.. In this way, citizens are staying out of Democracy (Demos+Kratos = Citizens keeps the power) and just.. watch and support their hopes and wills, like a game fans'. They doesn't play the game itself, but instead they are out, and yell, scream, stand up, cool down, be happy or unsatisfied, depending on what their political group does! Citizens instead of being the players, become the fans, and what they can only do is watch the players and at the end of the 4 years, they just say their opinion on what to do with them!.... It seems sick! ..And of course it has nothing to do with Democracy - actually it is against, democracy!. A huge disadvantage of this, is that citizens as "fans" of the "political game" they never can take responsibilities! And this fact, making them "political irresponsible", surely decrease the political level (and thus all other levels - quality of life etc) of our civilizations! Problem #4. By utilizing Political Parties, we cover up the ugly truth, that only a small percentage of 1/12 is represented, in that system where some use call fake, as "Democracy". The rest 11/12 stays out, and a high percentage of those people that are not represented from the one they want, is compromised by the fact that it's representatives are belonging to the same Political Party with the one that elected. In this case, and in order to deceive citizens to be compromised, Political Parties gain more power than the representatives. Political Parties becomes symbols higher than any representative, thus citizens to give more emphasis to the Political Parties, and not to the representatives they elect. And in this point we can see the problem. The representatives becomes tools for the Political Parties. The citizens starts to elect Political Parties, via representatives. Representatives which actually represents the citizens, are "forced" to obey and support the Political Parties, thus citizens too, are forced - in the political active scene - to obey and support the Political Parties, or to stay out! The citizens stop to have any free will decisions with direct impact on the political system and laws (the game), but become just conciliar voices for their team. Representatives on the other hand stop, represent the citizens, and instead they represent the power and the players of the Political Parties, which citizens has elect, based on the "majority rule". Problem #5. Closely relative to the problem #4, the new problem that arise is that 10,000,000 (in Greece) different thoughts and needs for every specific problem (every possible law), are simplified to 5 different Political Teams for all problems (and possible laws)! However we could accept this situation, and say.. "ok.. this is a implication. It's natural to have Democracy losses". I agree, but also it is natural the next problem that makes the whole situation totally "unnatural" for Democracy!

Problem #6. The different Political Parties, which are based on different ideologies, are "forced" to be always opponents!.. Specially when we think of the rule, that only one Political Party can be the Government Party - a rule that increase in significant levels competition among the Political Parties. But even if we hadn't that rule, each Political Party in order "to survive", to be clearly discriminative from the other parties, in order not to loose it's citizens "fans" and to not confuse it's fans, has to work not based on what is the best for all the citizens, but based on what is the best for the Political Party itself. And this leads to the fact that Political Parties never support the Government Party. In this case, any law that Government Party is proposing, can not be passed. This means no progress, instability, bad situations. The only way to overcome this situation, is to increase the number of Political parties - ideologies. However, at least in my country, this situation never worked well. The political game here has become complicated, and this is done, due to the fact that Political Parties are worrying more for their identity and existence and less for the people that support them. Modification to Democracy #4 In order to overcome Problem #6, in my country they have set up rules-laws that support the "self-dependence" for the Political-Parties. What this means? That they give to the party with the most percentage extra percentage (taken from the other parties) in order to pass the 50% that is required for self-dependence. In this way, the first Political Party takes the right to pass any law it wants, ignoring all the others, and this means that there is no danger for political instability and no progress. Problem #7. However, the first political party with self-dependence, has only a few differences from a tyranny party. It can vote any law it want's for the next 4 years, without even caring for different opinions! Still, it's really interesting the fact that no-one cares about this fact. They think it is democratic and thus it is right. But as we saw, the 4 modifications to the Democracy, has made it anti-Democratic! And let's see some examples. A. In Greece National Elections of 2009, there was a law that is was giving to the first Political Party +13.33% bonus, which was taken from the other parties. This means, that a political party that has gain 38% votes from all the citizens can take more than 50% and pass any law it wants for the next 4 years. Where is the Democracy in this system? B. In Greece National Elections of 2009, citizens that didn't vote or vote white paper (no party), was about 32%, while the first Political Party took 44% in the rest of 68% of the citizens that voted. This means that the first Political Party was only voted by 29.9% of the citizens of Greece! - However, due to the system, this Political Party with less that 30%, reached 53.33% and now is self-dependence. We can see one 23.33% increase, in order to give full power to the first Political Party, to govern. How did it took 23.33% increase? It took 13.33% increase with the (anti-Democracy) law they had vote together with the previous political party. The rest 10% was a boost stolen by the citizens that didn't vote, or vote white paper. Actually, because that Party took 44% in 68% of the total votes, it took 32%x0.44 = +14% from the percentage that didn't vote, while other parties took 10.7%, 2.4%, 1.8%, 1.5%, 0.8% (+0.8% to other parties). If we had Democracy, as politics claims, which is based on EQUALITY, the rest 32% should equally divided to all parties, taking all about 32%/[total parties], about 2%.. And not taking 14% the first party and 0.8% the last one! This is not fair, not equal, not Democratic. The answer I took from A. Georgiadis to the above subject with the 32%, is that, those that didn't vote

lost their right support a party, and those they should not be taken into consideration, as it was done in ancient Athens. Well.. If we had the Democracy that Ancient Athens had, I would accept that opinion! But with this system of government that we have, which is anti-Democratic, and towards to Tyrannic, this option is not right, because it just help the majority and not equal - democratic, all parties. In Ancient Athens, anyone that didn't interested or had knowledge for a law, didn't voting it, leaving the more relative to decide - for that reason he wasn't taken into consideration. But in this system that we vote for hope and will, selecting the best Tyranny for our future the things are completely different. People doesn't vote, not because they don't know or interested for a specific subject, but because they subconsciously has understand that.. they actually vote for their Tirany party, and they just.. don't like it! They do not vote, in order to assert to this fake, anti-Democratic, system which actually is called "Tirany of majority". I don't know if it is true, but someone said to me, that in America, only small percentages are voting in national elections, about 15-20%, while the rest 80% is not. And instead all to think of what is the problem, (the problem is that Democracy has become via many modifications to Tyranny of Majority) they just leave those people... on the outside and continue govern like Tyrannizes, talking about.. democracy. Well... DEMOCRACY AS IT IS NOW, wasn't invented in Greece!.... What we have now, IS NOT DEMOCRACY, and I proved why.. It's just Tyranny of Majority. (at least in Greece)