An interesting discussion took place in our last L&C III class. Unluckily, we didn’t have time enough to deepen into it. The question, a relevant one now that elections are on their way, was the following:
Is ours a real democracy? To what extent?
I imagine you’ve got lots of things to say, so I’m eager to read your comments.
27 comments:
Well, I was not present in that class to hear the context of the debate but, at least to me, there's no doubt that we live in a genuine democracy rather than in a pseudo- democracy. It is not at all clear to me what would be the elements that makes this democracy a non- real one. Provided that one can elect his or her representative for the goverment, then one lives in a democracy. Provided that a reduced group of people elect the governor of millions, the one is under an Olygarchy. Provided that a king rules, then one is under a Monarchy. Provided that some people take by force a goverment, then one is under a dictatorship. So, what are the elements to say that this democracy is not genuine or real?
i´m not sure i agree with you because how can you find a democratic goverment if they are the responsible of making people poor and without education. they change and desing education according to their need. the want to be in power and we are not allow to participate. eve though we can take part of a discussion,or a strike, do they pay attention to us? the answer is no. they do what they want. if you can´t believe me watch the news and you ´ll see my point.
marisol
Well Marisol, sorry to tell you this, but I am honestly trying to make an effort to undestand you, but I can't. First, you seem to blame on Democracy because there's poverty everywhere. Does this mean that poverty is the result of our Democracy? Very likely it is not, poverty may be the result of disastrous neoliberal economical decisions that were taken decades ago; like the change of work law, just to give you one example, intended to satisfy the needs of firm or coorporation owners rather than the needs of workers. Such change of law introduced besides new concepts like firm re-structuration and labour flexibilization which have been resulting as effects in unemployment and poverty as well. Second, the fact that one can strike to claim for something means that we fortunately live in a context of Democracy. Thirty five years ago this situation was completely different as far as I could read from History books: citizens could not protest nor even claim for a right. Why? Because there was no democracy. But coming back to the actual events, if you refer to the ruralists, who have been stricking for months, and some claim they are not being heard by the government, many people ask themselves if these ruralists hear the claim of the goverment as well.
As I said during tha claas when we discussed this topic, I think that our society does not have a genuine democracy, as regars SOME aspects at least. Take the example of the elections to come on June. During these days I have heard a lot about a new terminolgy or concept: "candidatos testimoniales" ( sorry, I do not know the translation into English) According to what I have understood, these candIdates only propose themselves in the elections to win but not to take on the function they were elected to carry out. This means that althougt we choose someone we think represents our point of view, in the end the political party that is in power now (or the married couple in our case) point out a person they think can be beneficial for them to carry out certain function. So it seems that it does not matter who we choose because in the end politicians have the real choice. It can be said that this is not democratic at all.
I particularly think that the country where we live is a democracy. The problem is that those who have political power do whatever to remain there and do less to solve the real problems that citizens suffers everyday. Have in mind that we have the right to vote whoever we believe, but let's be honest; Parties of the left are very incompetent. If they rule the country, it will be our ruin. Besides, remember a little, when the Radicals were in charged of the country they left it in a complete disaster (1989 and 2001). Justicialistas are the ones who have done something for this country. I don't deny that they have taken bad decisions, but they could carry on the republic decently (Always in a way). On the whole, what we have is lack of real political leaders who can deal with our problems. Unless we found one, we will still continue the way we are now.
But people, be grateful that we are not supressed as in Cuba and we can enjoy our freedom of land and speech!
Yes Robert, definitely totally agree with you. This issue of incompetence is very impòrtant to bare in mind before an election and brings to my memory those pathetic events of a Radical president who seemed to have no other choice rather than flying away from the pink house by helicopter during 2001. Since then, I promised myself never again to vote someone from that party. On the other hand, let me disagree with you in at least the idea that left wing parties are incompetents. In this sense, it sounds absurd to label them as such if one considers that they have never been in power. I suppose that their fatal flaw consists of being divided or disfragmented. ok bye
In my opinion we live in a real democracy, although it has many problems and defects. If we bare in mind that the word "democracy" means "popular government", that is to say that the power is held by citizens, I think that we are part of a democracy because people have the chance of electing their own representatives. Besides, we may change the things voting for others politicians. With another political system this is imposible. What is true is that not always there is freedom of press, one of the main features of the democracy, but as I said at the very beginning it is a defect.
In my opinion we are part of a "democracy" because we have the chance of electing our own representatives but some people are confused about this concept. I agree with Jesica in the sense that we choose a candidate but in the end politicians have the real choice. Maybe we can try to vote some left wing politicians. I'm not saying that they could be the solution but they never were given the posssibility of ruling. Radicals never finish their goverment and Justicialistas are always the same politicians. It seems that there is no possibility of a real change in our country.
Yes definitely left wing politicians have never been given the possibility of ruling, as I read before. When ocassionaly one hears left politicians like Pino Solanas talking in political programmes, one instantly becomes aware of a great deal of intellectualism displayed by this respectable man and foremost how deeply he is concerned with our society problems by denouncing the social asymetries and injustices. Another left wing candidate from Capital is Julio Zamora, who rejected a priviledge given to polititians called 'Jubilaciones de Privilegio'. It's hard to imitate Julio, isn't he? Honestly, hearing of people like these, there's no possibility of doubt before an election.
I think that we live in a democratic country but as yesica says it fails in some aspects.We as citizens can vote and choose for our politicians.However,we can not choose the candidates for being our representatives.In this sense,they put themselves to be the candidates,so it is not a complete democratic act.There are many questionable facts.However,it is important the freedom we have to express our opinions and feelings and nobody can take this tools out.We have to fight four our rights and the freedom of speech everyday because these features are also part of live in democracy...bye
Well, I really do not like talking about politics because it does not call my attention at all. Obviously, as a citizen of this country, I have to analyse and choose the best candidate I think is the "correct" one to occupy the important places that we are giving to them. The problem is that this "correctness" is not suitable in the most of the cases. I do not have too much experience on voting and electing representatives. My only experiense was in 2007 during the presidential elections. I read a lot about the candidates to make a good decision, but I was really nervous about it.
Taking into account the topic of discussion, I think we live in a democratic country, but it has a lot of deceits. Equality among citizens is one of them.
I think we live in a democracy country, because, as Martin said before, the term "democracy" means that the power is held by citizens.However, I agreed with Flavia in the sense that we can not choose the candidates for being our representatives, so it is a bit confusing when we talk about the freedom for choosing our representatives.
I believe that we live in a democratic country but I think this democracy has certain restrictions. As regards voting, I think that sometimes we don' t know who to vote because there isn' t a single candidate who hasn' t been involved in corruption or done something illegal. And as regards the government, I believe that they do manipulate information and the press and that journalists are not free to say what they think. Another thing I' ve heard lots of times is that workers are obliged by trade unions to go on strike and even the government pay these people for going to "celebrations" or things like that. So, apparently a lot of people in this country cannot decide freely about their deeds or sayings.
Actually, to answer if ours is a real democracy is not so easy as it seems to be. I wonder whether all of us apply the same conception of democracy to give our opinions about such a paramount topic. What is the meaning of democracy? Democracy has its origins in Ancient Greece. It is derived from the Greek DEMOKRATIA, "popular gorvenment". It is a form of government in which state-power is supported by the majority of citizens within a country.Even though there is no universally accepted definition of "democracy", the essential principles of Democracy are that all citizens have egalitarian opportunities to power,to welfare, to freedoms and liberties. "The majority rule" is usually described as a feature of Democracy, and for this the "majority"
may become "tyrannical" and may abuse the rights of "minority". The most important "tool" that people possess to express their ideological-political will is Suffrage. By means of this, in most democracies, eligible voters can vote in elections of representatives. Freedom of political expression, freedom of speech and freedom of press are the cornestones so that citizens are informed and able to vote in their personal interests and necessities. Democracy has been definided generally as a set of explicit and pre-established rules for political participation, open competition and the peaceful resolution of conflicts...So, it can be inferred that our country has not reached the total significance of Democracy yet. However, this present governmental regime may be considered as a "healthy" democracy after all De Facto dictatorships in which we have lived and in which we were not able to give this kind of opinions that we are giving in this blog. To conclude, as I cannot answer if ours is a real democracy, I would like to share some concepts about the issue:"Democracy cannot consist solely of elections that are nearly always fictitious and managed by rich landlowners and professional politicians. In democracies the poor are more powerful than the rich, because there are more of them and whatever is decided by majority is sovereign.(...)" Enesto "Che" Guevara. Today, in our country, this truth turns out to be dangerous, when a broad percentage of voters happen to be either illiterate , or semiliterate or"starved".
Susana Guaglianone
I agree with you Susana, I think that we as a country have not yet reached or understood the real concept or "ways of doing things" of a democracy. We must work a lot towards the construction of this idea, especially in the classrooms, since we as teachers have a privileged place from where to speak and help our students in understanding or putting in practice the principles of this way of government.
I've found this interesting survey that I think connects with what we're discussing here. See if you find it of interest: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/nota.asp?nota_id=1129826&pid=6474567&toi=6261
As regards the survey, I must say that the fact that people do not know much about the elections is really desappointing but ,at the same time, it does not surprise me. AS it is mentioned in the article, the only thing most people know about the elections it is because in the news they are informed about " candidaturas testimoniales" and pieces of news of a tv show where the candidates are satirized. This very serious because if we know that there is a representative crisis but do not know and not understand what it is going on with the government and the elctions: How are we going be able to change it?
I agree with Mariana that our democracy has restrictions but I think that we, defending our right to vote and our freedom of thinking, have the chance of electing who does his or her job in a correct way. Besides, I consider that there are many people who are no corrupts so perhaps we have to vote these people who many times do not belong to the main parties.
I agree with you Martin, the problem is that many times we do not have enough information about those people. Besides, I think that sometimes it is better to choose between the ones you know have chances, at least if you do not want a person to be at power you can choose the opposing party that you really know is going to compete.
I agree with you Mariana, and as regards the information we have about the candidates it's true that we don't know a bit about their proyects. But, as we talked in the last class, it's also because they don't have proyects and because all those who have one are the ones that don't have money to be in television so we don't know them. In my opinion is our faul too. Because we still vote them.
Hi, I'm not at all agree with Mariana's comment. According to that way of reasoning, if one as citizen do not want someone in the power, then the only existing possibility is to select a candidate from the main oppossing party that is likely to compete because the other candidates from smaller parties has no chances. So, what happens to the candidates from the smaller parties that are available for voting? Well, following this wrong perspective they do not have strenght and it is better not to select them. This is precisely why millions and millions of Argentines have been always voting the traditional parties that we all know since the advenment of our Democracy. Bye
I do not think that mariana´s perspective is wrong I just do not agree with her. I think we need a deep change and we won´t have it if we keep on voting those politicians that were in power for the last decades or those bussinesmen that were very involved with corrupt politicians in the 90´s. In fact, if there are candidates that do not have chances to win is simply because we do not vote them due to the fact we are little informed. We as citizens should be responsible enough to get informed about the candidates, who they are and their projects. We should understand that, in a minor degree, we are responsible for the things that occured in our country as well.
I agree with the ones who said that we live in Democracy and that our problem is the ones who are in the position to change things and do not do it. We are tired of voting candidates that promised millions of things to solve problems and then everything remains the same. The worst thing for me is not the corrupt politicians that we have but the impossibility that the good ones find in their way to improve things. So I will vote and support this Democracy as long as I have the hope that things would be better in the future. Besides, at least, we have the possibility of voting and maybe change something. We should reflect about the other nations that are oppressed and cannot claim for their rights.
P.R
I think most of us agree that we live in democracy. I just was thinking what we could do to use the right we have to change things we consider unfair in a proper way. Sometimes when we are against a desicion, we go on strikes without thinking that other citizens can be affected. However, this seems to be the only solution that we find to be heard.
Well Jesica L., in my personal case I do not feel in the least degree responsible for the things that occurred in our country since I never voted any of the candidates of the 90'. On the contrary, I consider myself a victim affected by those problems in such a manner that in the 2000- 2001 governmental period I lost everything I had won in the economical sense, having no future, no perspective of work. The more I see in the past during those years 2000-2002, the less inclined I feel to vote someone from that party. In second place, surely that the more informed one is about a candidate, the more one can expand his knowledge about him. But to inform citizens about themselves, polititians should spend a lot of money in propaganda. It is publicly known of candidates that have been spending 50.000.000$ for this elections. So considering this, I wonder to what a degree such candidates could be representing me. Very likely, these candidates seems to be representing those people who are respalding them rather than myself. Finally, I also doubt about the fact that absorbing all the media propaganda of a particular candidate really means to be well informed.
I agree with Nestor in that we should find other ways of knowing about the candidates than the media, but I also think that is difficult sometimes because we cannot find the time to do it. I also think that we should use our energy to think about something fruitful instead of keeping on looking for someone to blame. Democracy is something that must be built by all the citizens and one of the foundantions of this way of government is tolerance. So we should respect what the majority has choosen even though we may not like it.
Hi Mariana, probably I might have hurt someone's feelings by expressing that during the 2000/1 period of government, I lost my life in the economical sense. I'm sorry, but everything I have mentioned are facts which very likely occurred to millions of disfortunate people, and I canno't avoid mentioning those facts. However, I am not blaming anyone in particular. Interestingly, this tactic of blaming and critizising is a characteristic of the candidates of the opposition and, in this sense, I agree with you that one should spend one's own energy to think about something fruitful instead of critizicing. Well bye- bye.
Post a Comment