Ruling Power

By Roger Colins

The House of Commons in session

It's always a point of controversy to discuss war, religion, sex or politics. Controversial because these are all very much a personal point of view and disagreeing with a persons belief displays a rather callous disposition and assumes that one person, put simply, claims to know better than the other.

Of course, we don't know any better. The lot of us are crawling around blind just trying to do the best we can, the best way we know how.

A person can't really be judged a lesser being by anyone else because when it comes down to it, any one of us could be right. Dogs have their good and bad points the same as cats but which is overall 'a better pet'? We just can't be sure.

Democracy comes from the ancient Greek word demos 'of the people'. Curiously, communism has a remarkably similar definition being 'owned by the people'.

This being so, one can't help but wonder how the two found themselves in such opposition.

Communism without it's historical application is quite the excellent idea. So is democracy. National socialism works very well and monarchy, should it be genuinely benevolent, would be highly popular. It seems governance has just gotten stuck in history.


Power Play

Perhaps it has something to do with power. The adage goes that absolute power corrupts, absolute. Does it apply?

It would if you include dictatorship but not when these particular instances are designed to spread the attributes of power over a wide area.

Vladimir Putin. President of Russia

Lust for power, then. A person that finds himself in power may only want more.

The limits to their success may only depend on the limits to their morals and should this person discover that he has none, he or she could very well develop a messiah complex.

The concept of democracy differs somewhat from the rest in only one particular and that is corruption.

Any other system has a lot more holes that beg for exploitation. The lustful immoral are drawn in like moths to the flame.

Leaving consensus aside, democracy is still the most corrupt-proof government we have to work with and yet these holes keep cropping up.

Back handers, bribes, quid pro quo and back scratching constitute the epicentre for corruption, especially in a democracy. Politicians are looking for votes and will sell their mothers to appease as much of the electorate as humanly possibly.


By Design

Barack Obama. President of the United States of America

There is also the issue of funding and this is predominant across all government types.

A candidate has to publicise his entry, gain support from his party, present his policies and spread the word.

In order to do this the media is enlisted to help out and the only way to create more publicity than your opponent is to shovel the most amount of money at the media.

Does that mean the candidate willing to impart the most money will win? Certainly seems that way.

Votes are there to give the most practicable forum for opinion. Buying votes if rife in many democratic states globally but it is still down to the individual should the electorate give up his free will for a few pennies more because the practise has become established, part and parcel with how the country decides who gets to take over next.

The very existence of any government's infrastructure including anarchy, shows that there is a vested interest in how things should or should not be done. How things should be done has to lie in the hands of the people, even if it is anarchy.

Hierarchy of representatives from local council all the way up to the cabinet allows a conduit of communication from the people to the person. Representative, is a choice word.


A Civilian Servant

Politician or advocate, leader or reformist, lunatic or genius; when they stand at the front and commence parley that person represents those that gave over the responsibility. There is another name for this station.

David Cameron. Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

A servant.

Should that person digress from such position to express and relay the thoughts, feelings and desires of his or her constituency, they are no longer representative of the people they claim to speak for.

Suggesting that a representative has no personal interest what-so-ever is quite at odds to the allure of power.

Finding a person that has no interest in power to serve as one's representative may seem daunting but there is a final point to be made.

If said person has a proven track record of service to his or her country then they would not refuse the honour, they could not or it would go against all that they have previously sought out and accomplished.

#power #government #ethics