Pirates and Democracy

Transcription

1 Pirates and Democracy Presented by Paul Nollen Alexandre Zenon DEMOCRACY SQUAD - Belgium The goal of this workshop is to present some elements about democracy in order to start up discussion about our definition of Democracy. We will try to give a little historical background, some information about democracy today in the world and about the current projects we know that are attempting to move democracy forward. 1 Direct democracy c

2 Pirates and Democracy anno 2013 A hundred years before the French Revolution, the buccaneer companies were run on lines in which liberty, equality and fraternity were the rule. In a buccaneer camp, the captain was elected and could be deposed by the votes of the crew. The crew, and not the captain, decided whether to attack a particular ship, or a fleet of ships. (source: wikipedia) DEMOCRACY SQUAD 2 Direct democracy c

3 Elections have nothing to do with democracy Voting serves only to select leaders, not to directly decide policy The "idea that electoral participation means popular control of government is so deeply implanted in the psyches of most Americans that even the most overtly skeptical cannot fully free themselves from it" (B.Ginsberg) From Democracy without Elections (Brian Martin) 3

4 Elections have nothing to do with democracy But then, what is democracy DEMOCRACY = legislative power of the people The people are SOVEREIGN In a true democracy there is no authority above the people. DIRECT means without intermediary, or forced delegation What we usually call democracy is in fact PARTICRACY 4

5 What is wrong with elections? Electoral Representative systems NON PARTISAN ( Nebraska,..) SINGLE DOMINANT PARTY TWO POLITICAL PARTIES MULTIPLE POLTICAL PARTIES Main characteristics are : FORCED DELEGATION for YEARS PARTICRACY 5

6 What is wrong with elections? Power tends to corrupt Modern electoral representative democracies Power rests effectively with a small number of people They tend to be always the same This is the definition of oligarchy (rule by few) 6

7 What is wrong with elections? Power tends to corrupt The structures of institutions lead to abuses of power Roberto Michels, 1911 Mission Missiondrift: drift:preservation preservationof ofthe the organization organizationitself itself The iron law of oligarchy 7

8 What is wrong with elections? Power tends to corrupt Social psychology Thirst for power is correlated to other personality traits (Bennett J. 1988) Machiavellianism: tendency to deceive and manipulate other people for one s personal gain. "Never tell anyone the real reason you did something unless it is useful to do so Arrogance Low conscientiousness 8

9 What is wrong with elections? Power tends to corrupt Politicians are morally little different from anyone else. The expectations and pressures on them are much greater. Positions of great power both attract the most ambitious and ruthless people and bring out the worst features of those who obtain them. It is not the individuals who should be blamed, but the system in which they operate. ( From Democracy without Elections ) Together with the iron law of oligarchy of organizations we have a very powerful combination. 9

10 What is wrong with elections? Power tends to corrupt Why elections in a Particracy invariably lead to oligarchy? We don t really have a choice: there is little difference between the viable candidates Parties make deals influencing their program after elections to form majorities Our power is extremely limited in time: every 4-5 years and nothing in between -> no intervention possible Money influences the result overwhelmingly: campaign contribution, media ownership, lobbying : EU lobbies spending from 50 biggest corporations: Euro + undeclared amount! The choice is difficult: an enormous amount of variables to take into account, including psychological variables (e.g. Is he trustworthy? Is he lying?, etc ) 10

11 What is wrong with elections? Power tends to corrupt Things do not tend to get better Percent agreeing that people have a say in what government does Matsusaka 2004 & Gallup polls

12 What is wrong with elections? Politicians: a necessary evil? Every elites in history have used myths to justify their power Today, the representative political system is based on the idea that people are not able to govern themselves, that they need elites to decide what s good for them Is it really so? Are politicians a necessary evil? 12

13 Sovereignty to the people: Direct Democracy Why? Solution against the abuses of power (Checks and balances) Setting the political agenda Real representation: the point of view of each citizen is taken into account in each single decision If they want to Representation by sortition (Demarchy) or non partisan Efficiency: wisdom of crowds 13

14 Sovereignty to the people: Direct Democracy The wisdom of crowds Averaging people s opinions may allow to reach better decisions 14

15 Sovereignty to the people: Direct Democracy What are the basic ingredients? Agenda setting = Initiative Discussion and debate = Reflection Decision = Legislation By Representation Initiative Referendum - Recall 15

16 Sovereignty to the people: Direct Democracy What are the basic conditions? Freedom of speech Freedom of organisation Transparency in government Respect for all the people A reliable justice department 16

17 Sovereignty to the people: Direct Democracy What is SOVEREIGNTY? In the parliamentary democracy of the UK SOVEREIGNTY is described as follows: The principle of Parliamentary sovereignty is the unshakeable keystone of Britain s judicial system; it guarantees the continued supremacy of parliament. A codified constitution, which in many other countries restricts the powers of government, does not exist in Britain. Thus the only check on the power of Parliament is the sovereignty of future parliaments legislation can always be overturned, treaties can always be broken and participation in the European Union is never truly binding. In the direct democracy of Switzerland sovereignty belongs to the citizens 17

18 Sovereignty to the people: Direct Democracy Examples: Around half the US states Germany (states and communes) Venezuela (consejos comunales) Brazil Italy (federal and local) Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia (referendum) but in a way, they all have their differences 18

19 Sovereignty to the people: Direct Democracy Major types Direct: California,. No interference of elected representatives Indirect : Switzerland, Elected representatives can launch a counterproposal This possibilities becomes part of tactics that can be used. - Citizens are launching an initiative - Representatives are launching a counter proposal - Citizens have the right to redrawn their initiative or stand by it - Citizens have the right to launch a referendum on the counter proposal This means that there is a possibility that citizens have to vote on three proposals about the same issue. In case of acceptance of two or three of the proposals the proposal with most yes votes wins (double yes). 19

20 Direct Democracy in Switzerland Role of the parliament: Proposed laws are submitted to referendum either obligatorily (constitutional changes) or through citizen choice (signature gathering) They are revocable (cantons) Their budget is voted on (cantons) They can make counter-proposals on initiatives 20

21 Direct Democracy in Switzerland The backbone: Referendum: vote on politicians law proposals obligatory or citizen-initiated ( plebiscite is not allowed) Initiative: law proposals submitted by citizens Recall: end the mandate of elected representatives Mandatory vote on budget at local level Free participation : delegation from non voters to voters The result is binding! 21

22 Direct Democracy in Switzerland The Swiss system of Direct Democracy is a balance between different views on democracy - Libertarian : democracy starts at municipal level and free associations are formed bottom-up. - Constitutional : Switzerland has a constitution (but no constitutional court). - Populist : The citizens, and only them, can change their constitution if they want to. A change of the constitution needs a double majority of the cantons and the people. 22

23 Direct Democracy in Switzerland Majority rule and Consensus - Majority rule (50%+1) : never changed where people have the power to do so - Special case : Switzerland double majority. - Cure : Can lead to tyranny of a minority Jeremy Waldron, 1999, Law and Disagreement. May's theorem Condorcet's jury theorem - Consensus : can be reached in small groups with enough common ground no right to another opinion watering down support (unstable solution) pressure on the last opponent(s) James M Buchanan, Stability of solutions: 23

24 Criticisms of Direct Democracy Views on Direct Democracy -Libertarian : democracy, if necessary at all, is only acceptable at the lowest juridical level, municipality, neighborhood,... Direct Democracy is viewed as dictatorship of the majority. - Constitutional : democracy has to be limited by a constitution, a social contract, divine law, - Populist : there is no authority above the people. Direct Democracy is not perfect, it is a continuous learning system (source IRI Europe) 24

25 Criticisms of Direct Democracy Higher Justice Invoking a Higher Justice is a high risk for any type of democracy. International law : Human rights : which? defined democratically? Natural law : reason and revelation Liberal natural law ( Locke,.. ) Devine Law ( Inquisition, Sharia,..) The imposition of a higher justice holds the danger of an exceptional and persistent tyrannical dictatorship. In most cases this higher justice is characterised by granting privileges to a very limited group,.. Law interpreters, some categories of citizens, high priests... It is not the Law that imposes problems but the interpretation and enforcement of that interpretation by a powerfull elite, in some cases even appointed or payd by that same elite (for example the constitutional court in the US). 25

26 Criticisms of Direct Democracy As an example we can look at the suggestions of the Social threefolding (source wikipedia) They distinguished three realms of society: The economy Politics and human rights Cultural institutions including science, education, arts and religion. They suggested that the three would only function together harmoniously when each was granted sufficient independence. This has become known as "social threefolding". Examples: A government should not be able to control culture; i.e., how people think, learn, or worship. A particular religion or ideology should not control the levers of the State. Pluralism and freedom were the ideal for education and cultural life. Concerning children, all families, not just those with economic means, should be enabled to choose among a wide variety of independent, non-government or public schools, from kindergarten through high school. 26

27 How to go from here to there? Politicians don t want Direct Democracy and will do everything they can to prevent it from happening The Trojan horse brings Direct Democracy from within the representative system 27

28 How to go from here to there? Transitory state Allows to adjust the system smoothly Allows to make people know about direct democracy and how it works Allows to bring Direct Democracy without the need for the approval of the representative system or a revolution Ultimate objective Introduce a democratic system that has the approval of all citizens 28

29 29

30 30

31 How to go from here to there? E-voting E-voting has been used successfully in official elections: Estonia Switzerland UK 31

32 How to go from here to there? Voting by Proxy Voting by proxy (delegation) It may be interesting that voting by proxy (delegation) be allowed whereby a citizen may cast a vote on behalf of another citizen, as long as there is an official and public (or accountable) agreement between the citizens, ensuring maximum participation. The direct Member s vote can always override the delegate's vote and a Member can change their delegate at any time. Any citizen has the right to become a delegate. Voting by proxy = part of Liquid democracy 32

33 How to go from here to there? E-voting Pros and cons Speed Cost Potentially the fastest means of policy decision-making Could potentially be too fast => prevents thorough debate Potentially the cheapest method Campaigns needed to explain and convince could be expensive Representation Maximum representation if citizens participate directly and vote via delegates Reliability/security Can allow real auditability Trust Can be fully open and accessible to anyone s scrutiny Could exclude people that don t have easy access to computers Still some security concerns at the level of personal computers People might not trust something they don t clearly understand 33

34 Pirate Democracy Incompatibilities Party program. Has to attract as much people as possible. Makes party discipline necessary Democracy and an extensive program is a contradiction in itself. Party election candidates lists Makes it possible for parties to enforce party discipline Political power makes it possible for the parties to financially reward obedient representatives.

35 Pirate Democracy Party program: basic (Participation, Transparency, revision patent legislation, freedom of speech, freedom of organisation, protection of privacy, free internet, individual human rights) Extension: Task Forces who initiate referenda or are working in support of citizens initiatives and petitions In abstention of Democracy, the party initiates local liquid democracy in accordance with the existing law. Example : - The Pirates are against observation camera's in public places - The Pirates supports the peoples initiative to make observation camera's with face recognition in public places subject to an obligatory referendum.

36 THE DEVILISH DETAILS Experiences with referenda 36

37 Participation quorum If the quorum is to high a quorum results in a boycott action - unfair against the people who make the effort to vote. - no theoretical justification whatsoever - no comparable rule in the representative system Therefore We support the principle of the free mandate: everybody may vote if he wishes to do so, or give delegation to those who vote. 37

38 Adjourn a decision The fact that a citizens initiative can t adjourn a political decision is very discouraging. -> leads to a massive aversion of politics and politicians (Paust) 38

39 No exclusion of subjects In almost all Lander (Germany) the council decides if a referendum is allowed. A lot of subjects are excluded by law => this procedure is not objective (Paust). Therefore All the subjects who can be treated by representative democracy must be allowed in Direct Democracy 39

40 Publication A legally arranged publication by the government, with an equal opportunity to express the arguments of all parties involved, is indispensable. The use of public money for unilateral propaganda must be prohibited. The brochures, like they exist in Switzerland and California, can stand as a model. Also the Oregon type of information provision is a good example. (citizens Jury apointed by sortition) 40

41 OTHER TRICKS 41

42 Ratification The hold off of ratification or conversion into law, after a successful binding referendum, is another example of political tactics. There must be a strict ruling about timing and automatic consequences if not respected. 42

43 Counter Proposal If the government has the right to propose a counter proposal to an initiative that got the signature threshold, this counter proposal must be delivered within a limited time frame. At this moment (2011) the Swiss government is using his right to propose a counter proposal to stall an initiative, successfully launched in

44 Incompatibilities The Party program has to attract as much people as possible. This makes party discipline necessary. Democracy and an extensive program is a contradiction in itself The party election candidates list makes it possible to enforce party discipline if there is a renumeration to the function. Political power makes it possible for the parties to financially reward obedient representatives. 44

45 CONCLUSION In a true democracy there is no authority above the people. They decide by themselves, whenever they think it is necessary. This includes the right of secession and free association in a "bottom up" organisation 45

46 Questions to debate What is our definition of democracy? Do we need to keep some sort of representative system (sortition or elected)? How do we see the combination of a party program and democracy? Is the Trojan horse strategy a viable approach? Which obstacles do you anticipate? Would you propose another strategy to evolve to a real democracy? 46