re: "People are so used to representative systems that, when
confronted with having to make decisions, they come back
saying that it's wrong to impose our will on anyone else.
Very interesting indeed. It makes me think that the horrific
democratic deficit that we can identify in every
representative system is not, for most people, the problem,
it is a virtue. It gives them escape goats and deflects
personal responsibility. I am beginning to think that, deep
down that is what people want, even if they are ashamed to
admit it."
In spite of my earlier comment that "you are uncommonly thoughtful", the
disparaging remarks in your letter do not seem well thought out.
Specifically,
re: "... they come back saying that it's wrong to impose our will
on anyone else."
However much it may offend you, I lack the arrogance to believe I have a
right to "impose (my) will on anyone else." Indeed, in my 80 years,
I've seen enough to know I oppose anyone who feels they have that right.
It is not our place to impose our will; all we can do is seek a way to
find the will of the people and enable them to implement it.
re: "... even if they are ashamed to admit it."
I am not ashamed of the fact that I believe representative democracy is
the only rational form of government. I need representatives with the
intellect and integrity to address the problems of society as they
arise. I have neither the knowledge, nor access to the hard data that
would inform me, to make a judgment as to whether a bridge on the
highway is structurally sound, or whether bank capitalizations are
adequate, or whether the ice cap is growing or shrinking at an unusual
rate, or whether a foreign nation has Weapons of Mass Destruction (even
though the amount of hyperbole that surrounded the latter suggested it
was an engineered issue.) To imagine that lay citizens can, or should,
render judgments on such topics is the height of folly.
We elect people to investigate these matters and we provide them with
the resources necessary to do so. The fact that they have proven
inadequate to the task does not invalidate the system. It just shows
that we have elected incompetent people.
There is no question but that, as you once said, "... we have a problem
with being 'represented' by somebody who does not know us, does not
care, somebody who has their own agenda ...". When I first read that
assertion, I thought you recognized the fallacy of electoral processes,
dominated by vested interests, that take away our natural right to
select our own representatives. Now, it appears you had the words
right, but drew the wrong conclusion.
re: "It makes me think that the horrific democratic deficit that
we can identify in every representative system is not, for
most people, the problem, it is a virtue."
If by 'horrific democratic deficit' you mean that our so-called
representative democracies are in no way representative of the people,
your characterization is fine. But, to suggest the people think that
circumstance a virtue is shallow. There is no shortage of
dissatisfaction with such systems, there is only an inability, so far,
to understand why the present implementations are undemocratic.
Since you apparently reject the concept of representative democracy, you
implicitly deny that there are, among us, people we can trust to
represent us, people capable of conducting our government in a manner
that allows us to live our ordinary lives in peace and security. That
is, from my perspective, an inaccurate and slanderous view of our species.
We have no lack of capable, public-spirited people with integrity. What
we lack is the means of finding them and raising them to seats as our
representatives in our government.